are these tactics even effective? [Archive]

R_P_A_S

10th July 2007, 21:14

here is the link to the whole story..
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070710/ap_on_...LuT8y0d_zW9IxIF (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070710/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/mexico_gas_explosion&printer=1;_ylt=AlxStZ0waFFl3LuT8y0d_zW9IxIF)

Guerrilla group said behind gas blasts

A communique in the name of a small, leftist rebel group claimed responsibility Tuesday for explosions at Mexican gas pipelines, saying the guerrillas had planted explosives.

A statement signed by the "military zone command of the People's Revolutionary Army" — a tiny group that has largely been inactive in recent years — said it had caused the blasts and demanded the release of two men it identified as political prisoners.

"We inform our people that the actions of harassment will not stop" until the government releases the men, according to the statement dated Tuesday.

Tuesday's explosion forced the evacuation of communities around the town of Coroneo, near the central city of Queretaro, but caused no injuries or damage outside of the pipeline's installations, Pemex said in statement......

I mean... seriously. besides scaring the shit out of the average person in those towns where they set off their bombs and "attacks on the government" does this show any progresso forward? does it prove a point?

Are there tactics complete out of date? or what? :blink:

If they are a "tiny group" how can they call them selves "People's Revolutionary Army"? :unsure:

bcbm

10th July 2007, 21:20

The guerrilla isolated from any real struggle is EPIC FAIL.

R_P_A_S

10th July 2007, 21:24

Originally posted by black coffee black [email protected] 10, 2007 08:20 pm
The guerrilla isolated from any real struggle is EPIC FAIL.
well i guess that sort of my point. Because I got family in Queretaro and they work at a tire plant. they don't really think these guys are any revolutionaries. It's like my cousin told me, who is a leftist. "think about our kids" are we really going to leave their future at the hands of a few individuals with no real direction or ability to organize, dialogue??"

I support use of violence against oppression. but this is not a people's movement. I don't believe it gets any point across. just alienates the working class more. since they feel this "revolutionary guerrillas" are "crazy people"

bcbm

10th July 2007, 21:36

since they feel this "revolutionary guerrillas" are "crazy people"

Which, incidentally, isn't too far off of a description for small, isolated groups like these, especially if they're full-on guerrillas and not just weekend warriors.

apathy maybe

10th July 2007, 21:37

Personally, I have no problem with groups blowing up pipe lines like this. Except for the fact that there terminology and so on is not at all useful.

If they claimed to be acting merely in their own name, didn't attack civilians or civilian targets (and I don't classify cops or politicians as civilians) and otherwise put across the fact that they are operating on their own against capitalism, I'd support them.

Of course, I might not agree that the actions they take are useful or "revolutionary", but that is beside the point for me. Where there isn't a revolutionary movement (OK, in Mexico there is more of one then just north in the USA), this sort of action does no real harm. Where there is a revolutionary movement, it spreads the illusion that it (the movement) is perhaps bigger then it really is.

In this particular case, I'm sure that the people were evacuated for political purposes (to scare the town folk) rather then because of any real danger. Fuck the government.

bolshevik butcher

10th July 2007, 21:49

It's not really a question of having problems or moral qualms with these groups, it has to be a question of whether these methods are effective methods or not for the working class to seize power. History has surely proved that they are not, guerilla groups isolated from the mass working class will not be able to influence them or lead them to take power. That is not to say that we should dismiss armed struggle altogether but it has to be understood that armed groups have to be of the working class and their mass organisations. Also that armed struggle is one of many tactics, not something to be held as sacred above all others.

R_P_A_S

10th July 2007, 21:53

good comments compañeros

Nothing Human Is Alien

10th July 2007, 21:57

Obviously, no one serious about revolution plans on carrying the whole thing out with a small group, it's just that you have to start somewhere.

Guerrilla groups may start small, but have the objective of winning over masses of people to their ranks (and not only to join them in taking up arms, but also carrying out big strikes, sabotage, protests and other actions as happened in Cuba for instance).

If you're serious about this question, I could go on, and link you to a number of works explaining communist theories of guerrilla warfare.

R_P_A_S

10th July 2007, 22:34

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 10, 2007 08:57 pm
Obviously, no one serious about revolution plans on carrying the whole thing out with a small group, it's just that you have to start somewhere.

Guerrilla groups may start small, but have the objective of winning over masses of people to their ranks (and not only to join them in taking up arms, but also carrying out big strikes, sabotage, protests and other actions as happened in Cuba for instance).

If you're serious about this question, I could go on, and link you to a number of works explaining communist theories of guerrilla warfare.
these guys have been around for a while though. They aren't popular for a reason. I do believe that some armed groups can be effective. it has happened in the past and I don't see why not in the future. but then again these are different times. I KNOW the conditions, the class war and all remain the same. But maybe for Mexico and that area of the country these are NOT effective methods.

bolshevik butcher

10th July 2007, 22:41

The conditions for class war have changed in Latin America. Most if not all Latin American countries today are industrialised, they are no longer heavily agrian based economies. This means that to build a revolutionary force mainly on the peasantry is fundementally the wrong strategy. What is required is a force based on the industrial power of the working class.

Nothing Human Is Alien

10th July 2007, 23:25

these guys have been around for a while though. They aren't popular for a reason.

Sometimes things take time. The Maoists in Nepal grew their "people's army" slowly but surely. And, how do you know they aren't popular? From a few stories from individuals? How do you know they won't become popular at some point? Che wrote that the support wouldn't come immediately, that in the beginning and at different points, many will be indifferent, or even hostile to the guerrillas, but he also explained how to turn that around. Like I said, if you're serious about the subject and want to get more in depth, I'm prepared.

But maybe for Mexico and that area of the country these are NOT effective methods.

Maybe.. but maybe these comrades, who live there, are in a better position than you or I to judge which tactics and strategies are best at the moment.

The conditions for class war have changed in Latin America. Most if not all Latin American countries today are industrialised, they are no longer heavily agrian based economies. This means that to build a revolutionary force mainly on the peasantry is fundementally the wrong strategy. What is required is a force based on the industrial power of the working class.

Old argument, and it's been responded too ages ago.

"[Guerrillas are not]... slighting the struggles of the mass of organized workers. [It is] simply a matter of realistically analyzing the possibilities ... where the guarantees that usually adorn our constitutions are suspended or ignored [and where] the workers’ movements must go underground, without arms, illegal and facing enormous dangers. ...The situation is not as difficult in the open countryside, where the inhabitants can be supported by the armed guerrillas in places beyond the reach of the repressive forces.” - Che

SocialistMilitant

10th July 2007, 23:33

Originally posted by [email protected] 10, 2007 08:14 pm
Are there tactics complete out of date? or what? :blink:
Guerrilla war tactics like that or in general are not out of date and will never be. Look at Hezbollah last summer, they won the war. Look at Iraq or Afganistan, everytime they build up the pipelines they destroy them, they rebuild them and the guerrillas destroy them again.

bolshevik butcher

10th July 2007, 23:49

Socialist militant those struggles to which you reffer are national liberation struggles, that's a different discussion and a differnet kettle of fish in some respects.

CDL, it was responsed to in words but lets look at this materially. After all the struggle, hardship and sacrafice made by the guerillas in Latin America what has been gained. Cuba is an exception. Cuba was an agrian economy absed on rural proletarians that worked the sugan plantations. Surely a lesson of the last forty years or so in Latin America must be that guerilla struggles isolate socialist militants from the working class and that this has resulted in the failure of several struggles, not due to lack of dedication or heroism but a flawed strategy.

SocialistMilitant

11th July 2007, 00:16

Those were just examples. I'm talking about the guerrilla tactics in specfic. They definitely are not out of date.

R_P_A_S

11th July 2007, 00:27

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 10, 2007 10:25 pm

these guys have been around for a while though. They aren't popular for a reason.

Sometimes things take time. The Maoists in Nepal grew their "people's army" slowly but surely. And, how do you know they aren't popular? From a few stories from individuals? How do you know they won't become popular at some point? Che wrote that the support wouldn't come immediately, that in the beginning and at different points, many will be indifferent, or even hostile to the guerrillas, but he also explained how to turn that around. Like I said, if you're serious about the subject and want to get more in depth, I'm prepared.

I know you are better read than me. and you can pull out all sorts of quotes, examples, and what not. I'm not trying to get into no debate over these guys.

Yeah I guess I'm a bit out of line. or whatever, criticizing these guys methods and questioning them. I don't live in the area so how would I know? that's true. nor do I claim that I know what's best for the people in general, according to me.

But i think its fucking lame how some people champion this sort of shit like its some sort of advancement for the working class. :rolleyes:

small scale attacks like that don't prove a point, and don't gain you any popular support among your people, considering the fact that they are highly religious and conservative "country folk"

Nothing Human Is Alien

11th July 2007, 00:50

Okay, so you're not serious.

If you already have an answer, why ask a question?

R_P_A_S

11th July 2007, 02:43

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 10, 2007 11:50 pm
Okay, so you're not serious.

If you already have an answer, why ask a question?
I don't know what you trying to say with that. uh.?

I was just watching Univision, and they are having a damn field-day with these news. Unfortunetly the working class that these "revolutionary groups" are trying to represent by "blowing shit up" are more influenced and reached by shit media like Univision. hmm who are they going to side with?

I know some of you like to know that there are people out there giving hell to capitalism. But lets not get our personal satisfaction take our minds away from the real struggle.

Nothing Human Is Alien

11th July 2007, 03:03

"The real struggle" being ... posting here and criticizing people taking action?

R_P_A_S

11th July 2007, 03:18

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 11, 2007 02:03 am
"The real struggle" being ... posting here and criticizing people taking action?
come on bro. don't make this a personal thing. I'm a big supporter of what you and your organization do. I never said or imply that me posting here "criticizing" is THE REAL STRUGGLE. no need to get slick.

I guess I am being critical. is that a bad thing? You said these people are taking action. what kind of action is this? I'm not trying to come off as an anti-violence person. I've pointed out my support and understanding to arm struggle and the use of violence against oppression.

but i don't see how acts like this are effective methods to "represent the poor and exploited." besides they did this so that 2 people can get release from jail right?

Tuesday's explosion forced the evacuation of a number of people near the town of Coroneo in central Mexico.

It also shut down a pipeline running between Mexico City and Guadalajara.

Last week's blasts also interrupted oil supplies in Mexico, but oil exports were not affected, Pemex said.

The EPR first emerged in south-western Mexico in 1996, vowing to fight for social justice for the country's poor.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/6290222.stm

Published: 2007/07/10 23:59:15 GMT

© BBC MMVII

with their recent attacks, are they really fighting for the country's poor?.

R_P_A_S

11th July 2007, 03:27

And, how do you know they aren't popular? From a few stories from individuals? How do you know they won't become popular at some point?[QUOTE]

obviously I don't. i got no fucking clue. but with the bad rep the FARC has and the recent headlines about them.. I just seen these guys in Mexico being label as a terrorist group just like the FARC and other "revolutionaries" either because of the conditions, and what they were force to resort to: extortion, terrorism, kidnappings, drug trafficking, etc.

Dominicana_1965

11th July 2007, 03:47

Originally posted by R_P_A_S+July 11, 2007 01:43 am--> (R_P_A_S @ July 11, 2007 01:43 am)
Compañ[email protected] 10, 2007 11:50 pm
Okay, so you're not serious.

If you already have an answer, why ask a question?
I don't know what you trying to say with that. uh.?

I was just watching Univision, and they are having a damn field-day with these news. Unfortunetly the working class that these "revolutionary groups" are trying to represent by "blowing shit up" are more influenced and reached by shit media like Univision. hmm who are they going to side with?

I know some of you like to know that there are people out there giving hell to capitalism. But lets not get our personal satisfaction take our minds away from the real struggle. [/b]
If anything comrade.. the media creates a great sensation out of it because it deters democratic movements. For example CNN's report on the "riot" in Venezuela during RCTV's final days. (and even so...RCTV has appeared on satellite TV)

R_P_A_S

11th July 2007, 04:26

Originally posted by Trinitario+July 11, 2007 02:47 am--> (Trinitario @ July 11, 2007 02:47 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 01:43 am

Compañ[email protected] 10, 2007 11:50 pm
Okay, so you're not serious.

If you already have an answer, why ask a question?
I don't know what you trying to say with that. uh.?

I was just watching Univision, and they are having a damn field-day with these news. Unfortunetly the working class that these "revolutionary groups" are trying to represent by "blowing shit up" are more influenced and reached by shit media like Univision. hmm who are they going to side with?

I know some of you like to know that there are people out there giving hell to capitalism. But lets not get our personal satisfaction take our minds away from the real struggle.
If anything comrade.. the media creates a great sensation out of it because it deters democratic movements. For example CNN's report on the "riot" in Venezuela during RCTV's final days. (and even so...RCTV has appeared on satellite TV) [/b]
i know im using like reports form the media. I know how sick and bias they are. I also have some family close by to where this went down. So maybe this is why I cant shut up about it? i guess i feel "i know a lil more" or it hit close to home?

regardless im not trying to come off as an ass or nothing. so yeah. hmmm

Dominicana_1965

11th July 2007, 04:49

Originally posted by R_P_A_S+July 11, 2007 03:26 am--> (R_P_A_S @ July 11, 2007 03:26 am)
Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 02:47 am

Originally posted by [email protected] 11, 2007 01:43 am

Compañ[email protected] 10, 2007 11:50 pm
Okay, so you're not serious.

If you already have an answer, why ask a question?
I don't know what you trying to say with that. uh.?

I was just watching Univision, and they are having a damn field-day with these news. Unfortunetly the working class that these "revolutionary groups" are trying to represent by "blowing shit up" are more influenced and reached by shit media like Univision. hmm who are they going to side with?

I know some of you like to know that there are people out there giving hell to capitalism. But lets not get our personal satisfaction take our minds away from the real struggle.
If anything comrade.. the media creates a great sensation out of it because it deters democratic movements. For example CNN's report on the "riot" in Venezuela during RCTV's final days. (and even so...RCTV has appeared on satellite TV)
i know im using like reports form the media. I know how sick and bias they are. I also have some family close by to where this went down. So maybe this is why I cant shut up about it? i guess i feel "i know a lil more" or it hit close to home?

regardless im not trying to come off as an ass or nothing. so yeah. hmmm [/b]
I think one of the main reasons that people even consider some guerilla factions "terrorists" is because the population itself is depending on them. They take both sides and simply become non-existing in the class war.

Instead of viewing the Proletarian army as a form of their liberation they alter it into some sort of independent movement. Some people would rather just continue working under the status-quo and see the guerillas under a "them" and "us" stance. This could possibly be where the seperation between the people and guerillas happens.

Nothing Human Is Alien

11th July 2007, 05:02

Of course the bourgeoisie (and thus their press) will label these groups as terrorists. Did you expect otherwise? Since when do we judge people/movements on what the bourgeoisie labels them as? Today, all opponents (to varying degrees) of the current ruling class are "terrorists" - enemies in the "global war on terror," just as they were "red" - enemies in the "Cold War" earlier.

The EPR is not perfect, but I certainly won't join with the bourgeoisie in condemning them!

BTW, if anyone wants more info on them, here are some websites:
http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/bunker/5061/ (Español)
http://www.pdpr-epr.org/ (English & Español)

As for their size, they are better armed than the Zapatistas, and there is no shortage of supporters of that group here, or on the "left" generally.

R_P_A_S

11th July 2007, 05:41

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 11, 2007 04:02 am
Of course the bourgeoisie (and thus their press) will label these groups as terrorists. Did you expect otherwise? Since when do we judge people/movements on what the bourgeoisie labels them as? Today, all opponents (to varying degrees) of the current ruling class are "terrorists" - enemies in the "global war on terror," just as they were "red" - enemies in the "Cold War" earlier.

The EPR is not perfect, but I certainly won't join with the bourgeoisie in condemning them!

BTW, if anyone wants more info on them, here are some websites:
http://www.geocities.com/pentagon/bunker/5061/ (Español)
http://www.pdpr-epr.org/ (English & Español)

As for their size, they are better armed than the Zapatistas, and there is no shortage of supporters of that group here, or on the "left" generally.
yeah well i sure as hell not really using the media as my source. and I was not trying to come off like that. You all should know better.

Nothing Human Is Alien

11th July 2007, 05:45

Look, I'm not trying to argue with you needlessly comrade. But I can only go by what you type, I don't know what you're thinking..

Originally posted by you
obviously I don't. i got no fucking clue. but with the bad rep the FARC has and the recent headlines about them.. I just seen these guys in Mexico being label as a terrorist group just like the FARC and other "revolutionaries" either because of the conditions, and what they were force to resort to: extortion, terrorism, kidnappings, drug trafficking, etc.

In other words, you believe that the FARC is a terrorist group that does all of these things because ... the bourgeois press says so (what else could you mean by "headlines"?).

If I'm misunderstanding you, please clarify.

R_P_A_S

11th July 2007, 06:01

Originally posted by CompañeroDeLibertad+July 11, 2007 04:45 am--> (CompañeroDeLibertad @ July 11, 2007 04:45 am) Look, I'm not trying to argue with you needlessly comrade. But I can only go by what you type, I don't know what you're thinking..

you
obviously I don't. i got no fucking clue. but with the bad rep the FARC has and the recent headlines about them.. I just seen these guys in Mexico being label as a terrorist group just like the FARC and other "revolutionaries" either because of the conditions, and what they were force to resort to: extortion, terrorism, kidnappings, drug trafficking, etc.

In other words, you believe that the FARC is a terrorist group that does all of these things because ... the bourgeois press says so (what else could you mean by "headlines"?).

If I'm misunderstanding you, please clarify. [/b]
nah. i mean just read what I said... some of this groups started out with a genuine revolutionary objective and new conditions, harsher ones, loosing support and finance, taking on multiple wars at once has made em resort to tactics that are obviously not preferable like the drug trafficking and extortion and such.

shit that the corporate media can have a field day with and pretty much discredit them daily to millons of working class homes. I mean can you honestly say that the FARC is still a legit revolutionary guerrilla fighting for socialism and justice for the poor? Like I pointed out, new conditions and other things have effect the original goal and now they are force to use other methods, fight other wars and battles, etc.

and i guess what Im trying to say is that the EPR will be label terrorist just like the FARC by the media and the bourgeoisie. and It will take away from their influence amongs regular working people. ahh im gonna shut up now.. :wacko:

Nothing Human Is Alien

11th July 2007, 06:04

I mean can you honestly say that the FARC is still a legit revolutionary guerrilla fighting for socialism and justice for the poor?

Yes.

R_P_A_S

11th July 2007, 22:13

Originally posted by Compañ[email protected] 11, 2007 05:04 am

I mean can you honestly say that the FARC is still a legit revolutionary guerrilla fighting for socialism and justice for the poor?

Yes.
what do you think needs to be done so that the majority of Colombians can view and think of them as a legit revolutionary army in their favor?

As opposed to the terrorist label put on them?

Black Cross

11th July 2007, 22:35

Take out the media, especially if it is filtered through the government. Then there is no one to call them terrorists.

Comeback Kid

13th July 2007, 11:40

I really think the WeatherMen should reform.

R_P_A_S

13th July 2007, 20:50

Originally posted by Marxist-[email protected] 11, 2007 09:35 pm
Take out the media, especially if it is filtered through the government. Then there is no one to call them terrorists.
exactly. so why not launch an all out attack on the mass media. exposed them for the shit they really are... since they are the source of "information" for the rest of the people you want on your side.

as opposed to blowing some shit up? like gas lines.

which leaves your momma with out gas and she cant cook.
oh she really gonna side with you revolutionaries knowing you are the one cutting off her gas..
"good thing the government is looking for these terrorist! stop them!" :rolleyes:

RNK

14th July 2007, 00:46

Importantly, any theoretical guerilla force needs to modify its actions to somewhat merge with public opinion... rather than going around killing people or blowing stuff up, they should be more creative in their methods. If it is to be violent and/or destructive, then it should be qualitatively destructive. Not just "let's smash some windows for the hell of it". But an actual act of insurrection aimed to do permanent damage.

abbielives!

14th July 2007, 01:46

How can you even tell if the population supports violent action?

R_P_A_S

14th July 2007, 07:36

Originally posted by abbielives!@July 14, 2007 12:46 am
How can you even tell if the population supports violent action?
in these particular case I don't think they do. and most of them don't understand. these attacks where set of so that the government releases two of their comrades.

I honestly don't see how a quarter of the mexican population can side with these guys attack on the government.

I'm not saying they are not "real" or that their ultimate goal is not a socialist revolution. all I'm arguing is that these particular attacks and methods are not "for the people, not working class" and if they are. please tell me how are they.