First world guerrilla warfare!

[stonerboi]

I would like everyone on Che-Lives to give me their opinions on what they think of armed struggle in first world countries.

I know a lot of you support third world gurrilla groups, like the FARC, ELN, EZLN, and the Nepali Maoists.

But do you think it is wise to use guerrilla warfare against the capitalist system in first world countries like the USA, UK and Japan.

[Urban Rubble]

No, it isn't "wise". Research that shit for like 5 minutes and you'll see that it would be totally impossible.

[bluerev002]

I doubt it would ever be possible. There wont be enough support. The support would come from the people who already can see the wrongs their country has done, and there arent enough of those. Even if you tried going around taking the blindfolds off of people to have them see, the Govt. will blind more people at a faster rate than you can unblind.

I doubt that Guerrilla Warfare would work in the US, I dont know about Japan or UK, I've never been there.

[Vinny Rafarino]

There are two ways we can go with this comrade Stonerboi, we can allow ourselves to fall into the rhetoric of the new left and allow the capitalists to continue their imperialistic push across the globe while we all sit back with a nice cup of tea, read the communist manifesto and whine like dogs.

Or we can can hit back. Is either idealology going to advance political evolution any faster? No, however at least fighting back will prepare us for a time when larger scale attacks will be used. It also plays for quite the good time.

[Nobody]

I would recommend a stratagy of sabatoge and arson. While this will not collapse captitalism anytime so, it will encourage others to do the same. Plus, it requires no skill, little organization, and can be carried on almost indefintily.

[bluerev002]

I belive the best way to start is by making independent News Papers free from all the lies and US propaganda.

Its not exactly hitting any country hard, but its a good first step and it gets allies.

[elijahcraig]

I don't think sabatoge and violence will encourage anything. People are against violence like that, the spread of information is much more important.

[Dr. Rosenpenis]

I would advise the third world to free itself from imperialism, this would be the first step. The entire third would unite and become independent from the first world. Then the first world will collapse and/or will be conquered by communism.

[sc4r]

Quote: from COMRADE RAF on 9:46 pm on July 20, 2003
There are two ways we can go with this comrade Stonerboi, we can allow ourselves to fall into the rhetoric of the new left and allow the capitalists to continue their imperialistic push across the globe while we all sit back with a nice cup of tea, read the communist manifesto and whine like dogs.

Or we can can hit back. Is either idealology going to advance political evolution any faster? No, however at least fighting back will prepare us for a time when larger scale attacks will be used. It also plays for quite the good time.


I dont know whether to agree or heartily disagree.

Inaction, which is really all 'educate' amounts to, because everyone advocating it seems to ignore the fact that we have been educating for 150 years and thus far have convinced possibly 1%, certainly does not appeal to me.

On the other hand 1% support even if it could be mobilised is not going to trouble anybody to the extent of achieving change. At least not change in the direction we want.

Acts of minor terrorism will not win the day. It will just get us marginalised even more than we are.

In the third world militant action may work, but unless supported to at least some extent from the first will probably lead to at best transient gains.

Which leaves only political action through the established mechanisms, or economic control aquired through the existing mechanisms as far as I can see. Maybe others can see yet more options.

For maximum effect we educate, aquire political influence, aquire economic influence, and support revolution in the third world (and of course Cuba).

A pretty key step also is actually uniting the 1% of existing support. This means those who want to go further supporting those who dont want to go so far until they actually progress to where it matters. There is nothing so silly as a communist saying he wont ally with me because he wants more. The point is surely that unless he allies with me (and others) he wont get anything at all, not even a chance to convince me.

Even our oft stated opposition to stalinists is pretty dumb. Whats our actual beef? that they disagree fundamentally with goals? Nope, most of them dont. All they are guilty of is seeing Uncle Joe's actions as being a response to circumstances rather than the consequence of his unpleasant personality.

It seems hard for the more lovely of our comrades to believe that there were 1m-10m genuine hard line subversives and criminals in the USSR. Or maybe they think those people should have been treated nicely anyway.

BS. Any revolution is for sure going to cost more lives than Stalins count. So anyone supporting revolution can drop this reason for opposing Stalinists.

(Edited by sc4r at 11:41 pm on July 20, 2003)

[redstar2000]

The use of violence, however emotionally satisfying it can be, is fraught with difficulties.

The main problem is, indeed, the lack of "mass support" for such tactics as this time. That effectively rules out any "general" strategy of urban guerilla warfare.

Does that rule out violence altogether? I don't think so. In specific situations where substantial numbers of people are passionately opposed to some specific aspect or practice of capitalism, limited violence may actually enhance mass participation and increase the general level of militance.

The obvious contemporary example is the "black bloc" anarchists in the anti-globalization and anti-war movements. It should be noted that the "black bloc" is a tactic of self-defense...the people involved do not initiate damage to property until peaceful demonstrators are attacked by police.

Damage to symbols of capitalist/nationalist triumph might also be useful in raising consciousness. There is a group in San Francisco that, from time to time, alters billboards next to major freeways to deliver an anti-capitalist message. Back in the 1970s, the Weather Underground blew up a statue honoring the Chicago Police Department...twice!

Sabotage is a different "kind" of violence...but could certainly be useful in the course of a specific struggle. Anything which interfers with the enemy's ability to bring its repressive powers to bear will be helpful; is it technically possible, I wonder, to completely jam police radio broadcasts? You get the idea.

If people want to do this kind of thing, you have to think carefully about exactly what you want to do, how you expect to do it, and what message you want to convey. Violence is an educational tool...not a method of "speeding up the revolution".

And, as I have mentioned in other threads on this subject, you must only do this kind of thing with people you know and trust...and resist the impulse to boast of your accomplishments afterwards.

Recall the sad fate of Che himself when he attempted to "kick-start" a revolution in Bolivia.

And be careful.

:cool:

[sc4r]

Yeah I think I'd agree with that RS.

As long as any targets are picked with regard to how it will be reported and how it will therefore affect peoples perceptions I see nothing wrong in a bit of activism. It could be a good thing to say 'heck you want to do business with us moderate socialists unless you want that other lot instead'.

It always has worked. It has to be very carefully played mind.

[bluerev002]

Violence would be useless (even the kind that RS stated) w/o the people knowing, and I mean acctually KNOWING why these things were done.

I could go and do the best sabotage in the history of Guerrilla Warfare, but the mass media will surely twist this around and call it an act of terroism. Oncethe people can see these types of things in the news and be able to say "this is bullshit" then we are ready to fight.

[CopperGoat]

The best way to start a revolution in a first world country is to have all the workers go on strike..

[Nobody]

Gong back to my brief post encouraging sabatoge, I feel it should be bloodless, just damage/destroy the target, like a statue, then leave. Also mail the newspapers a copy of your manifrsto, so they know your beefs and it might get published, and someone might say "they are right". And you got one more supporter. Soon those 1's and two's become tens of thousands and it begins to snowball into a revolution. Of course this might take years and years.

[Sabocat]

Would a good place of "action" be the upcoming G8 in Georgia? Would this be the statement we're trying to get out?

What would be our best course of action there? I like the "Black Bloc" rules of engagement. No damage etc. until they attack peaceful protestors.

Would passing out leaflets with our "agenda" help the cause? Possibly something outlining what the G8 means to the world and society. Something the ''working class'' could identify with and hopefully help build our ranks.

I think we definitely need to step up the action. A concerted effort to harrass the capitalist machine. If we do nothing but talk about it, it's going to be business as usual. Nothing will get the attention of the public like a riot with 300,000 people at the G8. People will have to ask why people are protesting it.

"It has to start somewhere...It has to start sometime....What better place than here....What better time than now" RATM.

[mentalbunny]

Well from watching people's responses to stuff like animal rights people who set free loads of mink from farms in the new forest and May Day protests, they don't like it. Violence in the first world will be frowned upon by most people in the First World, especially by small very left-wing groups. People are just too comfortable with what capitalism brings. Yes there are several million people in the UK who get nothing but virtual slavery from capitalism, but how do you reassure them that guerrilla warfare will help? It'll just mean that the police and troops are brought out and the guerrillas are squashed.

The way for the first world is through strikes and democratic processes, not guerrilla warfare. The third world is a different kettle of fish, and I believe that Latin America holds the most promise.

[Non-Sectarian Bastard!]

Redstar 2000 - Violence is an educational tool...not a method of "speeding up the revolution".

If the revolution would begin and you would blow up a par example a (military) powerstation. It would certainly help to speed-up things in advantage of the "proletarians".

--------------

Educationing the people is a way of speeding up the revolution.

The proletarians will eventually get aware of their enslaved position in society. Because their position in society on social en economical area is getting worse with every law, so called to "catch up the damage of the economic crisis" and "combat terrorism".

If this proces continues, their position won't be much different from the Russian proletarians of before 1917.

Then the "proletarians" will get aware of their enslaved position compared to the lifestyle of their "masters".

----------

You could speed up things, by starting to educate the people now about their fate and other people's fate. About Communism/Socialism and the benefits, classstruggle etc.

Disgustipated I think we definitely need to step up the action. A concerted effort to harrass the capitalist machine. If we do nothing but talk about it, it's going to be business as usual. Nothing will get the attention of the public like a riot with 300,000 people at the G8. People will have to ask why people are protesting it.

Nop, most people don't ask themselves what we are protesting for, but 'd rather choose the easy answer provided by the established politicians and media and declare us for nuts and seeing the usual fights between police and us only strongens their idea about us.

---------

Geurilla Warfare certainly wouldn't help in the "nest of the beast". But actions such as destroying statues to attract attention for the socialist cause can be effective.

[bluerev002]

Quote: from Disgustapated on 12:08 pm on July 21, 2003
Would a good place of "action" be the upcoming G8 in Georgia? Would this be the statement we're trying to get out?

What would be our best course of action there? I like the "Black Bloc" rules of engagement. No damage etc. until they attack peaceful protestors.

Would passing out leaflets with our "agenda" help the cause? Possibly something outlining what the G8 means to the world and society. Something the ''working class'' could identify with and hopefully help build our ranks.

I think we definitely need to step up the action. A concerted effort to harrass the capitalist machine. If we do nothing but talk about it, it's going to be business as usual. Nothing will get the attention of the public like a riot with 300,000 people at the G8. People will have to ask why people are protesting it.

"It has to start somewhere...It has to start sometime....What better place than here....What better time than now" RATM.








Whats the G8? Is it an event? If it is and if its more than one day you could take several actions each day, one more severe than the next. You could start small with flyers one day and then the next do a public announcement on a stage. Whatever may work!

Oh and the "Black Bloc" thing MAY not work. A lot of the times its the peaceful protestors that get the job done. Like the Riots that broke out triying to stop a WTO meeting in Seattle and the police broke out and started beating the people. It was the peaceful ones taht didnt fight back that got what they wanted.

And yes, like Metalbunny said, most people wont like what your doing, they are too blind to see things straight. So if you try coming out of nowhere with violence they will be shocked and then after a week you will be forgotten. Try and try with small things like flyers, public speeches, concerts during luch at school and such and such.

And as thigs go for making the First world country fall, Victorcommie's preposition was probably the best way to go. Takes longer, but it will probably work best.

[Douche the Bagger]

I think we should start attacking the machine, including all it's outlets that keep it in power, without bloodshed. But first we(non-pussies that act) need a list, chose targets, plan then act. People wouldnt care, shyit. News is all about violence and since non of the attacks cant be pinned to any one thing(if all goes as planned), how can it be declared terrorism?

[Invader Zim]

I think the best way of bringing down the capitalist nations of the west is infact remarkably simple in theory yet hard to achive in practice, premote your cause to the people and gain support if not comitment from them. Then organise a general strike for a necessary commodity within these capitalist nations.

If you remeber a few years ago in britain there was the oil strike. That lasted only a few days yet it brought the capitalist nation of Britian to its knee's. You could not cause as much havock to a capitalist nation like britain even with a revolution of a million people. The government was pannicing with fears of collapse. Blair was even threatening to have the army come in and take the blockades down using force.

That is how you bring a capitalist nation down. You dont need guns you just need to squeeze the bollocks of the capitalists, and oil is the bollocks.

The saying I believe is "any nation is three meals away from revolution." That was true 100 years ago but replace oil with food.

[Vinny Rafarino]

That's a bit vague Bagger.

I've noticed the general theme among today's leftists is the "media perception" of urban armed struggle. I hate to burst you fantastic little bubble lads but the masses ALREADY have been turned against communist. No amount of "leaflet passing" and "peaceful demonstrating" is going to change the situation. While we have been *****ing among ourselves, the capitalists have effectively made communism as taboo as and disgusting to the masses as shagging a mule. Passive demonstration is what got us in this terrible mess to begin with.

As a massive revolution in the first world is virtually an impossibility we must simply strike at targets on a micro-scale with brutal effectiveness.

We are not cowards and we will not allow our party to fall by the wayside as the new-left would have us do.