Revolution versus Reform - On how our communist takeover is

[Acolyte Of Death]

Acolyte of Death, 17 June 2003-

It occurs to me that some of our comrades believe that a communist system (or at least, a better system than what we have now) can come forth from a reform movement. Where could this reform spring forth? From the schools say some - that if we seize control of the schools we can steep our next generations in the same spirit that we have and in doing so, hope to effect a communist system, carefully developing from our own, in perhaps a thousand years or more. There are others of us who disagree with this essentially Fabian standpoint, who believe that communism can only be enacted when life becomes so bad that revolution shall occur and change shall be effected immediately and completely.

Now, though we may have the same viewpoints, our ideas, then, differ in practise. How are we to enact a communist system?

We can either wait for ten thousand years, slowly enacting small reforms here and there, but without the uncertainty of a revolution, in hopes that ten thousand years from now (though life at the moment shall not be changed greatly) a better system shall evolve from this reform.

We can also wait and prepare for a revolution, when life inevitably gets worse and worse, until the day comes when an event happens to let loose the wrath of the people in one great flood from a pent-up dam. In this we risk that our system shall become totalitarian, but we give this for the ability to enact immediate change.

Now which is better?

[nz revolution]

Nice name... not

Revolution over reform definately. Why wait?

You been reading a bit of Rosa?

[dsmtuner]

I agree, I don't think we should wait a long ass time to start training. The time is now.

[BOZG]

We can either wait for ten thousand years, slowly enacting small reforms here and there, but without the uncertainty of a revolution, in hopes that ten thousand years from now (though life at the moment shall not be changed greatly) a better system shall evolve from this reform.

The capitalist class will always find some way or clawing back reforms so we can sit around and wait for as long as we like, communism can never be acheived tjrough the parliament and through reformism.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Now the big question lads. Once you have made a choice to organise and train, you actually have to find an organisation that will provide you with what you need.

Before you look, you must finalise what it is you want to accomplish. Ask yourself these questions;

1)Are you truly prepared to accept and perform the actions that will be required of you and can you accept the consequenses of such actions.

2)Do you wish to be involved in either urban OR rural guerilla warfare.


If you are still willing, you must then find an organisation that is "friendly" to your ideals. These organisations do not have adverts on bus benches. You must search them out. You will (most likely) not find them on the internet. You must intergrate with your local communist party and keep your mouth shut. Make attachments to indivuiduals based on their ideals. Slowly and quietly make your "views" known. If you do not find a suitable organisation quickly do not dispair. The odds are they will find you.

Once you have adopted the viewpoint of "armed Struggle" and are accepted into an organisation. My last bit of advice is this, DO NOT EVER BETRAY YOUR COMRADES.

[suffianr]

It doesn't have to be a case of either this or that. You need to think about being practical.

If you can affect a certain degree of positive change through reforms, why not use such avenues as footholds to secure or influence "conditions" for revolution? Why sit and wait for another angry mob to come around and storm the Bastille before making up your mind to do something? That's not revolution, that's herd behaviour.

Where I live, there is a Reformasi! movement, a grassroots movement of mainly Gen Y student radicals and disaffected urban professionals who want o change the way their government is doing things. I'd like to think that I'm part of this reform movement, but not because I've attended rallies and deomnstrations in the past, or spent hours distributing leaflets or lecturing friends in coffee shops...I'd like to think I'm part of it because I believe in it, and that's where it starts. I've done my share of positive things along the way, but revolution is still far off.

What can't wait for revolution should be attempted through reform, and what can't be reformed should have to go through the spin cycle of a revolution.

[Vinny Rafarino]

I think you have misunderstood my post comrade.

It is either "this or that" when you choose to get involced in urban armed struggle.

[suffianr]

I think you have misunderstood my post comrade.

It is either "this or that" when you choose to get involced in urban armed struggle.

Sorry, COMRADE RAF, I should have been more specific; my post was in response to Acolyte of Death's post, not yours. I wasn't arguing with you at all. :)

[Gregorio Allemagna]

I speak German so I read the German equivelant of CHE.COM. I must say their message board is more regimented but it deals only with one unified theme. Enough said, I would be glad to translate their post on this topic but it will be LONG: VERY, VERY LONG.

Anybody think it's a good idea?

[CubanFox]

Posted by CubanFox, Che-Lives Community, May 18th, 2003, "Implementing Socialism", Politics forum

This post is a hypothesis. All the questions are assuming that we are operating in St Vincent and the Grenadines, an island chain nation in the Caribbean.

Need it be violent?
Could we form a political party and win the hearts and minds of the 115,000 people on the islands?

Need a dictatorship be in power to begin our planning for a new government?
Would it be right for our political party (let's call it the St Vincent Socialist Party, or SVSP for short) to attempt to take power, either by democracy or with guns blazing, even if there is an undespotic cappie government in place?

Once the SVSP is in power, should we undertake radical reform?
Once we're in power in Kingstown, should we undertake massive social reform, such as, implementing the education system proposed in the Redstar2000 Papers or starting collective farms etc or should we go slowly as not to alienate our people?

Should we rigidly follow one ideology?
Should we follow a particular form of socialism, such as Castroism, regardless of what the people say? Should we even consult the people on what sort of social action takes place?

Drug laws?
As it is, St Vincent and the Grenadines is a major transshipment point for drugs from Columbia heading for the US. Should we legalize drugs, rendering this criminal industry impotent and possibly attracting people from the US to our country to take advantage of our new law?

Should we use propaganda and indoctrination?
Will we build murals of Lenin and Marx to adorn the streets? Teach our kids that socialism is right and capitalism is wrong? Should we let them decide, and allow open emigration if they wish to leave for America?

Religion...yay or nay?
Will a socialist St Vincent and the Grenadines be an atheist St Vincent and the Grenadines? (screw whoever thought though of that long name) Remember that 88% of St Vincentians practise Christinanity. Will we build churches and things, or will we knock them down and say "You are wrong and we are right!"? Or will we be tolerant and uphold freedom of speech?

Should we change our major exports?
Would it be a waste of time trying to change the country's economy away from bananas, arrowroot and tennis racquets to perhaps something less agricultural? Maybe we could make things such as rum and both tobacco and marijuana cigars; processed products that everyone loves and can be sold for a high profit overseas? More people are needed to work a cigar factory than say a banana farm. We could turn a 22% unemployment rate into a 0% unemployment rate.

On a less important manner, what about the flag?
Will we change it to all red with perhaps three golden diamonds in the middle, a bit like the current flag? Or will we keep it the way it is to appease people who want to preserve St Vincentian history?

Conclusion
Depending on your answers to the above questions, a St Vincent and the Grenadines ruled by the SVSP could be either a leftist utopia...or a Stalinist hell. Chose wisely.

If you can be bothered...
Please give your thoughts on each question.

Posted by redstar2000, Che-Lives Community, May 18th, 2003-06-05, "Implementing Socialism", Politics forum

Remember Grenada?

When the U.S. Marines arrive, all your questions will be moot.

I think we have to accept the unpleasant reality; until there is a massive uprising of the working class in an advanced capitalist country, one that actually has the resources to inflict serious harm on U.S. imperialism, the likelihood of real world answers to your questions are, at best, uncertain.

But as long as we're blowing smoke out of our asses...

(1) A parliamentary strategy might work in a tiny country, provided the attentions of the major capitalists were focused elsewhere and they didn't think in advance to flood the country with money during the election campaign. When the capitalists speak of "a free election", they mean one they can buy.

(2) Probably not; to be perceived as usurpers is not a good thing. To come to "power" as a consequence of a massive uprising would give us far more of a mandate to introduce sweeping changes.

(3) See 2 above; the more involved masses of people are, the more revolutionary you can be.

(4) Well, I think we are Marxists and should remain Marxists; what that would mean in practice would depend on the details of the situation.

(5) Yes, definitely legalize all drugs. (That would probably be the "excuse" that U.S. imperialism would use to invade us.) Alternatively, we could leave the drug laws on the books but just stop enforcing them.

(6) Certainly we should do everything we could to convince people that we were right; but yes, let those who want to leave do so. Plane tickets are cheaper than prisons.

(7) Start by nationalizing the big cathedrals, strip them of anything valuable and sell it abroad, then demolish them. See how it goes from there. Catholic clergy who give us a hard time in public get a one-way ticket to Rome. No visas to be issued to any "replacements"

(8) Yes, a small country is always better off if it can sell a "value-added" commodity on the world market. Coffee might also be a good product to produce if the cllimate will permit...but it should be a bean-to-package product.

(9) Conduct a popular referendum with half-a-dozen designs for a flag, including the old one.

A pleasant fantasy...



PS: An absurd name for a country, by the way. Look into the traditions of the islands for a name that is both secular and historical and re-name it accordingly.

[Gregorio Allemagna]

Think not only of Grenada, think about Panama. Seems Noreaga quit giving the CIA their cut. He was also getting quite close to Fidel. Fidel visited Panama a few weeks before the invasion.

The rule is simple: FOLLOW THE MONEY!!!

How else couold a marine Colonel afford a $2,000,000.00 house? Do you think Mr. North et.al. had their fingers in the pie?

[redstar2000]

Quote: from COMRADE RAF on 8:53 pm on June 26, 2003
Now the big question lads. Once you have made a choice to organise and train, you actually have to find an organisation that will provide you with what you need.

Before you look, you must finalise what it is you want to accomplish. Ask yourself these questions;

1)Are you truly prepared to accept and perform the actions that will be required of you and can you accept the consequenses of such actions.

2)Do you wish to be involved in either urban OR rural guerilla warfare.


If you are still willing, you must then find an organisation that is "friendly" to your ideals. These organisations do not have adverts on bus benches. You must search them out. You will (most likely) not find them on the internet. You must intergrate with your local communist party and keep your mouth shut. Make attachments to indivuiduals based on their ideals. Slowly and quietly make your "views" known. If you do not find a suitable organisation quickly do not dispair. The odds are they will find you.

Once you have adopted the viewpoint of "armed Struggle" and are accepted into an organisation. My last bit of advice is this, DO NOT EVER BETRAY YOUR COMRADES.




I suppose that's one way of approaching the matter.

The problem is that anyone who approaches you on this subject could be a cop, trying to set you up for heavy prison time...I've actually seen them try to work this scam.

Consequently, if you are really determined to do this sort of thing--and my political advice would be against it at the present time--I suggest that you do it only with people that you already know and trust, people that you've worked with politically for several years, people that have personal lives that are known to you, etc.

And once you do get involved in this kind of stuff, trust no one. Resist the urge to boast of your activities...it is a one-way ticket to a very nasty prison. Do not attempt to recruit any new people into your work without applying the same criteria--you must know and [/b]trust[/b] who you're working with.

If someone shows up who appears to be very knowledgable and confidant and who hints that they want to "help you", BEWARE! That's a COP!

I have to say that I think when you frame the debate in terms of "reform" vs. "urban guerilla warfare", that's a really bad way to look it. There are many forms of active resistance to capitalism that are neither "reformist" nor involve the risks of violent adventurism.

And you don't do the revolution much good serving 25 years-to-life in a federal gulag.

:cool:

[Gregorio Allemagna]

Oops, I forot to add this to my post.

As a practical term, if political change is the option chosen, we must start small. By smalll I mean House of Representaives and Senate first.

Presidential politics in America is a rich man's gamne. Bush wants to raise $270,000,000.00 for his reelection bid. What in the hell is he going to do with that much money? He can fly arround in Air Force One, Get on TV just by calling a news conference and start another war or "terrorist event" to bolster his popularity.

By starting a bit lower, maybe even State level, we stand a chance aginst the deluge of money the Republi-crats have.

[elijahcraig]

Lashing out in violence in small minorities will solve nothing in the present time. We need a mass movement, not a violent guerilla battle which is sure to leave the name of communism more foreign to the people than it already is. We work in ideas and spread them like a disease. I am not against armed struggle, I would just advise against it at the present time.

[Vinny Rafarino]

Good advice RS.

I have to disagree with you and comrade elijah on one issue. Now is the best time to beig to organise. A mass mobilisation will not proliferate out of tin air. The vulnerability of the populace has been dramatically increased through the rapid drop in GDP ove the last two years. Unemployment is now 6.91%. 32 million yanquees are below the poverty level. Yet if given the choice, they will choose to stay hope and hope it gets better. Why? They feel they have been given no other option.

We have not operated with any effectiveness for over a decade...some would say closer to two. We must take advantagn of the times! The people are upset at their government, yet they do not know how to manifest it properly. They yell at their teles and curse the media in place of mobilising and corrupting the very corporations that have put them in their current situation. We need to educate them that armed resistance is a plausible solution to save humanity from a severe period of decadence.

We have been waiting 15 years for this era, it was close to manifesting itself during the eightees, but times were not bad enough. Notice the frequency of operations did have a small upsurge in the mid to late eightees. Now is the time for action. We must show the world that our comrades fighting for freedom in the jungles are not alone in their struggle lads! Only two ioptions are available that will have any impact. One is a massive mobilisation of the working class. The other is small urban guerilla groups striking high profile targets in many cities at once with a heavy rotation of onagain/off again members.

Give me both of these at once and we have the tools of the destruction of the ruling class.

[Adolfo Mena]

Che once said in an interview that he gave in New York City on Dec.12 1964 just after His famous speech at the UN the day before, That he did not agree or will not support a guerrilla movement in first world countries. His reason was that these countries have the capital,intelligence and propaganda agencies to bring down such movement, some of the people present did not listen, They were menbers of Students for a Democratic Society that later became WM(Weatherman). And if you heard of them you know what the outcome was.

Prepare yourself,mass organize and then fight.

(Edited by Adolfo Mena at 7:49 pm on July 2, 2003)

[elijahcraig]

That's my point, I think the media propaganda would turn the guerillas into "terrorists", and if you read Che, you know he always stated that the guerilla army must have the support of the populace, which if the full assault of media propaganda etc. went through we'd be dead fast, and so would our mission.

[CubanFox]

Is it right to seek out countries that are ripe for revolution? Or should we be revolutionaries at home and nowhere else?

[Adolfo Mena]

I think other countries,like Che said (not 1st world countries. seek countries with out the means to exterminate you, countries with backward goverments). There are many of them in our continent where we could volunter our help.

"Otras tierras del mundo
reclaman el concurso de mis modestos esfuerzos"
Comandante Che Guevara

[Kez]

we should be where revolution is possible and in there we should be with the masses

[mentalbunny]

Adolfo, thanks for mentioning that thing that Che said, it does make a lot of sense and I think it would help those who are very enthusiastic if they could read these words of wisdom. (sorry that doesn't make much sense, does it?)

[AdolfoMena]

We just have to prepare our selfs until the moment is right, Educate yourself mentally and phisically. and I personally think that it makes sence to have to help other places before we create our own Revolution. We want to live in triunph, Not die in defeat.

[Elect Marx]

Reform can be used as a placebo for the masses. Any reform can be over-looked in times of rampant "patriotism." Anyone remember 9-11? Who can forget? Bush has played that card for a long time and managed to take civil rights back decades. Reform may be helpful, a suplement if you will. Revolution is the only action that allows a free society to form. Like has been said so many times, this must be global. Just as reform is not perminant and open to attack, so is an isoated revolution.

[MikeyBoy]

The problem with reformism is that usually becomes an anti-socialist reform. To clarify, a reform only gives the ruling clique a knowledge of their enemies, and they will give into reform so much as the government feeds it's people, just enough to keep them working. Reforms would be great, but they would probably stop short of accomplishing our goals as socialists. And if we don't continue 'radicalising', then the situation will inevitably grow worse as time continues. And then what will we do? Ask for another reform?
I would not support a bloody revolution either. Armed revolutions tend to factionalize parties and alienate people. Alienation is the last thing we need for a socialist movement. We want to heal the people not shoot them! A revolution would only work if:

a) we had support of the masses (which implies that the masses were actually class concious)

B) it was as bloodless as possible.

Because of the nature of the spontaneous revolution, a power vacuum is created that the proletariat is not always ready to fill. This leads to the creation of dictatorships and not dictatorships of the proletariat.

My personal opinion is that we need reforms that do not slow down as time goes on...we need reforms that will only grow more radical. That is the ideal situation though...social change tends to explode in brief periods of time.

I suppose what I want is Revolutionary Reform :P

[Elect Marx]

"Revolutionary Reform," is not possible. Reform uses the tools and system of the ruling class, thus why it does not make significant changes. Revolution changes the structure of society. Reform can save lives and help out society but it has NO perminance and can never change a system so dishonest influensial and coruput as capitalism.

[Marxist in Nebraska]

The left must carry out a two-pronged attack... working for immediate reforms while radicalizing and preparing for revolution. Lenin has a great quote (I do not know it word for word) about geniune revolutionaries pursuing immediate gains for the proletariat while holding a greater vision for the future.

[suffianr]

313C7 iVi4RX, have you ever witnessed a reform movement? Have you ever seen how quickly the fire can spread?

My country experienced such a situation, at the turn of this century. It's obviously a long story, but what happened was that a power struggle between the Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohammad, and his deputy, Anwar Ibrahim, launched a 'reform' movement that affected a huge cross-section of our urban populace, from workers to students to profeesionals. People questioned the validity of the Rule of Law, the independence of the judiciary, the Constitution, etc.

People gathered for demonstrations in the heart of Kuala Lumpur, something unheard of since the protests that radical left wing activists organised back in the Sixties...

The police were scrutinised, the media exposed, the government open to criticism...Considering how politically apathetic most Malaysian youth are nowadays (or were back then), the Reformasi movement, which peaked during the 98' Commonwealth Games, drew such a response from the masses that the people were even talking about a coup...

On the surface, the political landscape changed so much in the space of a few months that opposition parties were able to secure more constituencies in the snap elections than they ever had during the past few decades of 'elections'. And since then, although the intital push of the movement has somewhat slowed, we are now a little more aware of what goes on in Putrajaya...and perhaps now more than ever, willing to take a stand.

[Vinny Rafarino]

"One of the permanent concerns of the urban guerrilla is his identification with popular causes to win public support.

Where government actions become inept and corrupt, the urban guerrilla should not hesitate to step in to show that he opposes the government and to gain mass sympathy. The present government, for example, imposes heavy financial burdens and excessively high taxes on the people. It is up to the urban guerrilla to attack the dictatorship's tax collection system and to obstruct its financial activity, throwing all the weight of violent revolutionary action against it.

The urban guerrilla fights not only to upset the tax and collection system: the arm of revolutionary violence must also be directed against those government organs that raise prices and those who direct them, as well as against the wealthiest of the national and foreign profiteers and the important property owners; in short against all those who accumulate huge fortunes out of the high cost of living, the wages of hunger, excessive prices and rents.

Foreign trusts, such as refrigeration and other North American plants that monopolize the market and the manufacture of general food supplies, must be systematically attacked by the urban guerrilla.

The rebellion of the urban guerrilla and his persistence in intervening in public questions is the best way of insuring public report of the cause we defend. We repeat and insist on repeating: it is the best way of insuring public support. As soon as a reasonable section of the population begins to take seriously the action of the urban guerrilla, his success is guaranteed.

The government has no alternative except to intensify repression. The police networks, house searches, arrests of innocent people and of suspects, closing off streets, make life in the city unbearable. The military dictatorship embarks on massive political persecution. Political assassinations and police terror become routine.

In spite of all this, the police systematically fail. The armed forces, the navy, and the air force are mobilized and undertake routine police functions. Even so they find no way to halt guerrilla operations, nor to wipe out the revolutionary organization with its fragmented groups that move around and operate throughout the national territory persistently and contagiously.

The people refuse to collaborate with the authorities, and the general sentiment is that the government is unjust, incapable of solving problems, and resorts purely and simply to the physical liquidation of its opponents.

The political situation in the country is transformed into a military situation in which the gorillas appear more and more to be the ones responsible for errors and violence, while the problems in the lives of the people become truly catastrophic.

When they see the militarists and the dictatorship on the brink of the abyss and fearing the consequences of a revolutionary war which is already at a fairly advanced and irreversible level, the pacifiers, always to be found within the ruling classes, and the right-wing opportunists, partisans of nonviolent struggle, join hands and circulate rumors behind the scenes, begging the hangmen for elections, "redemocratization," constitutional reforms, and other tripe designed to fool the masses and make them stop the revolutionary rebellion in the cities and the rural areas of the country.

But, watching the revolutionaries, the people now understand that it is a farce to vote in elections which have as their sole objective guaranteeing the continuation of the military dictatorship and covering up its crimes.

Attacking wholeheartedly this election farce and the so-called "political solution" so appealing to the opportunists, the urban guerrilla must become more aggressive and violent, resorting without letup to sabotage, terrorism, expropriations, assaults, kidnapings, executions, etc.

This answers any attempt to fool the masses with the opening of Congress and the reorganization of political parties--parties of the government and of the opposition it allows--when all the time the parliament and the so-called parties function thanks to the license of the military dictatorship in a true spectacle of marionettes and dogs on a leash.

The role of the urban guerrilla, in order to win the support of the people, is to continue fighting, keeping in mind the interest of the masses and heightening the disastrous situation in which the government must act. These are the circumstances, disastrous for the dictatorship, which permit the revolutionaries to open rural guerrilla warfare in the midst of the uncontrollable expansion of urban rebellion.

The urban guerrilla is engaged in revolutionary action in favor of the people and with it seeks the participation of the masses in the struggle against the military dictatorship and for the liberation of the country from the yoke of the United States. Beginning with the city and with the support of the people, the rural guerrilla war develops rapidly, establishing its infrastructure carefully while the urban area continues the rebellion."

Carlos Marighella