Some of my ideas on how to create the conditions necessary for a revolution

[freakazoid]

I was originally planning on posting this in the Do things need to get worse before they can get better? thread, http://www.revleft.com/vb/do-things-need-t82216/index.html but when I started to write my response I just kept on getting deeper and deeper into it until not everything in it had to do with the main question and I felt that it needed its own thread to be discussed and critiqued. I kept on writing because for some time now I have been planing on writing how I think we should get up to and achieve our revolution. And up to this point have only written sporadically on the subject with nothing much in it. So here is part of my incomplete work;

I believe that things do need to get worse, but it must be worse fast. For if it is slow the people will simply adjust and become accustomed to it. To give an example of this would be the frog example. If you throw a frog into a boiling pot it will jump right out, but if you put it into a room temperature water then start to boil it slowly it will sit in it till it dies. The reason for this is because if it gets worse faster than the people can get accustomed to then they will start to get angry. It will cause people to polarize, instead of simply not carrying as long as they are not bothered to much. By polarizing the people they will start to think more radical ideas and will start to see the true face of capitalism and come to our side, of course there will be others who go the opposite but this is why we must be organized and active in getting our ideas out there and creating a strong foundation now from which to branch out from.
Now not only do they need to get worse but we should be directing how it gets worse. One section of it getting worse for the people is political. For instance if the BNP got in power there I think it is obvious that things would get bad. This would radicalize the people though towards our favor, as long as we are doing our part to show them what we are about. Also if the government started to get really intrusive into peoples lives when they are not used to it this would also start to get them upset. A police state government doesn't need a lot of followers, just a few dedicated people to follow the party line and enforce the populace into servitude. Which is good for us because that means that it won't take much for them to get in charge and we can get the numbers on our side by showing the people in servitude the alternative, because in order for communism/anarchy to work we need the people to believe in it.
Another section for it to get worse in is just in everyday peoples lives. For instance the intrusive government. But not just that but also if the price of food and gas started going really high, and fast for the reasons given earlier don't forget, it would really start to hit the peoples budgets. Or if the power infrastructure wasn't so stable, constant black outs and such, this would start to get the people to become angry.
But if these things were to happen we must be extremely active in getting the foundation, a large amount of people who are committed communists/anarchists. Think like how the Black Panthers had things, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panthers Not only must this happen but we should be active in helping it happen, all the while being prepared to take advantage of it. The conditions must be set up to where some party like the BNP is able to get in charge. The government must be forced to turn into a police state. And that would happen when it feels threatened, such as angry people rioting over the fact that they can't afford food and over the power and water infrastructure. And those are things that we can effect. Now things should only get worse after we have a foundation of dedicated and supportive people, people we can operate freely around without fear of needing a security culture, which should always be practice anyways. After we have this foundation we can start to attack the infrastructure. Even though I know most of you all understandably hate the ELF, there tactics would be really useful for our purposes. To quote some of there stuff from here, http://www.revleft.com/vb/communique-earth-liberation-t82962/index.html

Form 'stormy night' action groups, encourage friends you trust. A tight community of love is a powerful force.
Recon -- check out targets that fit your plan and go over what you will do
Attack --
powerlines: cut supporting cables, unbolt towers, and base supports, saw wooden poles.
transformers: shoot out, bonfires, throw metal chains on top, or blow them up.
computers: smash, burn or flood buildings.Some other thing could be like sabotage things in the workplace to slow production, or at there distribution centers destroying there products or there ability to ship products, thereby causing the company to have to either drastically raise its prices or to even lay off people, further causing people to see reasons capitalism is bad. Doing things like this will 1. cause the everyday to day lives of people to get worse 2. cause the government to start to impose more and more authoritarian laws. At first it will be seen as a minor annoyance from the government and they won't do anything to authoritarian that would upset the people. But if we are cordinated with our attacks and implement them on a large scale the government will start to take notice. Also they need to be done on a regular bases, with more and more frequent attacks on larger and larger targets. To go from something like simply taking out power lines to blowing up buildings like the Weather Underground. Also sporadic attacks on the government itself at places like there police centers or prisons.
Now when we target things to merely get the government to become authoritative we do not want the populace to know that it was us because then they will think that we are nothing but a bunch of violent punks. But there are times when it would perhaps be to our benefit for the people to know who did it, and when we do we must be very selective of our targets and make completely sure that we are able to get our message across informing the people why we took such action. But that should only happen after the government is extremely authoritarian where the people will actually start to see it as the enemy therefore making us look like a sort of Robin Hood type character fighting an unjust system, because then more extreme and violent measures will not be looked down upon so much. When doing that the goal isn't to get the government to become more authoritative, it is to spread our message to the public, so selection is of up most importance, and that means that it will vary from place to place. You can look at how the Weather Underground chose some of there targets, for examples of that, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weatherman_%28organization%29
Now armed violence should only be had when the government is the first to use extreme violence against the people. This is to make sure that we are not seen as to extreme and violent and therefore turning off many people to our cause. But when it happens we must be ever prepared in arms use and tactics.

But for now I think this will suffice. More to come sometime in the maybe near future, :)
So please post on if you in general agree with this or disagree and why. Also how you would make my paper better. Only constructive criticism please, no one liner Your an idiot posts.

Thanks,

edit - And because I forgot to add this in, here is my militia thread for the part of the foundation building, http://www.revleft.com/vb/setting-up-militia-t54170/index.html?t=54170& :D

[Bilan]

:ohmy:



I believe that things do need to get worse, but it must be worse fast. For if it is slow the people will simply adjust and become accustomed to it. To give an example of this would be the frog example. If you throw a frog into a boiling pot it will jump right out, but if you put it into a room temperature water then start to boil it slowly it will sit in it till it dies. The reason for this is because if it gets worse faster than the people can get accustomed to then they will start to get angry. It will cause people to polarize, instead of simply not carrying as long as they are not bothered to much. By polarizing the people they will start to think more radical ideas and will start to see the true face of capitalism and come to our side, of course there will be others who go the opposite but this is why we must be organized and active in getting our ideas out there and creating a strong foundation now from which to branch out from.

Firstly, things are terrible; I dont know what you mean about getting worse. Wealth in almost all nations is continually being polarized, the only thing that remains is the facade.
Things don't need to get worse, the facade has to be pulled off.

Secondly, I think it was aptly put when Bristol said to assume people will only revolt when there is no food in their bellies is insulting to say the least. The needs and requirements of humans, although centred around our material conditions, and economics, are not limited to them.

The revolts in Paris, and indeed, near everywhere, in the 60's are an example of this.
They didn't revolt in Paris because they were hungry.

That's not to say, people don't revolt over that, but that's not all they revolt over, and to argue that we need things to be worse is just not true.

You'd find a large amount of people in Western societies, as that what you must be talking about as shit is absolutely terrible in developing countries, do feel alienated, but even more, the ones who realize something is completely fucked about our societies feel as if nothing can be done.
"It'll never happen here" - sound familiar?



Now not only do they need to get worse but we should be directing how it gets worse.:mad:


One section of it getting worse for the people is political. For instance if the BNP got in power there I think it is obvious that things would get bad. This would radicalize the people though towards our favor, as long as we are doing our part to show them what we are about....Just how bad are you fucking allowing things to get?



Also if the government started to get really intrusive into peoples lives when they are not used to it this would also start to get them upset. A police state government doesn't need a lot of followers, just a few dedicated people to follow the party line and enforce the populace into servitude. Which is good for us because that means that it won't take much for them to get in charge and we can get the numbers on our side by showing the people in servitude the alternative, because in order for communism/anarchy to work we need the people to believe in it.
That is extremely dangerous.



But if these things were to happen we must be extremely active in getting the foundation, a large amount of people who are committed communists/anarchists. Think like how the Black Panthers had things, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panthers
The Black Panthers did not support things getting worse.
The BPP had their roots in the ghetto, where life is tough. They weren't hoping for the government to crack down on them, they were hoping to build a revolutionary movement to smash the government.



Not only must this happen but we should be active in helping it happen, all the while being prepared to take advantage of it.Jesus christ...


....
You actually worry me with this post.
This isn't a video game.

Look, I feel what you're trying to say, but you're attitude is all wrong (And to be honest, a little bit disgusting).

Do you know the Situationists?
Read this: Instructions for an Insurrection (http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/6.insurrection.htm) and work from there. I think you'll find alot of things you'll sympathise with, and your politics and understanding will develop from there.
(Sorry if this sounds patronising or anything)

Edit: Fixed.

[freakazoid]

Thank you for replying, in a non mean way, :)


Firstly, things are terrible; I dont know what you mean about getting worse. Wealth in almost all nations is continually being polarized, the only thing that remains is the facade.While things are terrible, the problem is people simply get complacent with the current situation. They just get used to it, like the frog example.


the facade has to be pulled off.Yes. The reason it needs to come off is so the people see it for how it really is, which is what my idea would do.


The revolts in Paris, and indeed, near everywhere, in the 60's are an example of this.
They didn't revolt in Paris because they were hungryYes, and one of the reasons would be the draft, which would be the thing getting really worse really fast.


You'd find a large amount of people in Western societies, as that what you must be talking about as shit is absolutely terrible in developing countries,Yeah, I'm pretty much only dealing with them.


You'd find a large amount of people in Western societies, as that what you must be talking about as shit is absolutely terrible in developing countries, do feel alienated, but even more, the ones who realize something is completely fucked about our societies feel as if nothing can be done.
"It'll never happen here" - sound familiar?Yes, and this is a large problem, and it kind of goes back to the reason being that people just get used to it and live with it. Since they are only one person what can they do to change? And that is why we need to be far reaching, so they can have people for support. People don't normally do radical things on there own unless it is something they strongly believe in or if they feel that there is simply nothing more to lose.

:( Don't get angry, it all revolves around making it better.


...Just how bad are you fucking allowing things to get?Depends on how fast the bad happens. If it is really fast then it should wake even more people up. Again the frog example, :)


That is extremely dangerous.Could you clarify please?


The Black Panthers did not support things getting worse.
The BPP had their roots in the ghetto, where life is tough. They weren't hoping for the government to crack down on them, they were hoping to build a revolutionary movement to smash the government.Yes, things were very bad for the people they were helping. Which is why they were more easy to radicalize. Also I mentioned the BPP for there ability to create a strong foundation of supporters and the way they went about it.


Jesus christ...He is good, :P



You actually worry me with this post.:( I figured I would do that. I was pretty hesitant to actually even post it for fear of alienating myself. But I put it out there anyway in hopes to get some feedback.


Do you know the Situationists?
Read this: Instructions for an Insurrection and work from there. I think you'll find alot of things you'll sympathise with, and your politics and understanding will develop from there.No. Who are they? And your link doesn't work,. It links right back to this page.:(


(Sorry if this sounds patronising or anything)Nope, no problem I knew it would be controversial but I thank you for posting. :)

[Bilan]

Fixed.

[freakazoid]

I read it, but I still wasn't really sure what it was that they were trying to say lol, :(

But I found a wiki article on them, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Situationist_International Haven't read completely through it yet, but from what I have read they sound pretty interesting.

Now I know that you disagree with what it is that I propose, but do you disagree with the main points behind it? The parts where the people will not revolt if things only slowly get worse, but will if they get worse really fast, basically the frog example.

[Bilan]

While things are terrible, the problem is people simply get complacent with the current situation. They just get used to it, like the frog example.

That's not a reason to make it worse.



Yes. The reason it needs to come off is so the people see it for how it really is, which is what my idea would do.

No, what your idea would do is make things even worse, and it'd be those who want to make things better making it so. Can't you see what repercussions that would have?

Yes, and one of the reasons would be the draft, which would be the thing getting really worse really fast.




Yes, and this is a large problem, and it kind of goes back to the reason being that people just get used to it and live with it. Since they are only one person what can they do to change? And that is why we need to be far reaching, so they can have people for support. People don't normally do radical things on there own unless it is something they strongly believe in or if they feel that there is simply nothing more to lose.

That, again, doesn't justify what you're advocating. You simply don't realize what your advocating in this sense. This is mass suffering; totalitarianism and fascism to help start a revolution.
It doesn't even make sense.




Could you clarify please?

You're supporting fascists rise to power.
Just stop and think for a minute what that means for the working class, the poor, ethnic minorities, gays, transgendered people, etc.
They're not just going to allow you to roam free and do as you please.

Look at what happened to the KPD under the Nazi regime; the communists under Mussolini; the anarchists under Franco.
Did that happen?
No. They were murdered, deported, imprisoned, etc.



Yes, things were very bad for the people they were helping. Which is why they were more easy to radicalize. Also I mentioned the BPP for there ability to create a strong foundation of supporters and the way they went about it.

They went about it by organizing for their freedom, not their oppression.




:( I figured I would do that. I was pretty hesitant to actually even post it for fear of alienating myself. But I put it out there anyway in hopes to get some feedback.

You just really need to think about what you're saying.


The SI are probably one of the most important revolutionary groups of the 60's.
Browse and read some texts. (http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/)

[LOUDNOISE]

Dude I agree 1,000%. And when everyone gets angry, it's just gonna be fucking righteous. We're gonna storm congress. Storm the white house. Storm the Exxon Building. Storm the Blackwater Building. Storm the UN. Storm all the buildings. Take the power back. Get fucking violent. We know it;s not a video game. I've been ready for this revolution. The 60's were great. And peace may have done a lot. But violence is the only answer for the 21st century.

[freakazoid]

That's not a reason to make it worse.Only temporarily worse.


You're supporting fascists rise to power.To there own destruction.

I know that you disagree with what I am proposing. But do you disagree with the reason for what I am proposing;

1. That the people are too apathetic and complacent and need to be radicalized.

2. That a reform here and a reform there is nothing but a tool of the bourgeois to pacify the people.

3. That the things can slowly get worse and worse and the people will not revolt because it is a gradual change, the whole frog in a pot example.

4. That if things got really worse for some reason the people would start to take notice and radicalize and do things that they would normally not do.

I look at this and can come to the only conclusion that we need to make things worse so as to make them better. But again this has to be completely planned out, have to have our foundation.


Dude I agree 1,000%....I like your enthusiasm. :)

[InTheMatterOfBoots]

The perspective seems all wrong here. The qualitative implications of what you are saying aside (wilfully wishing to impoverish the lives of innocent people - a distinctly non-pre figurative and un-anarchistic perspective). I think you have to ask the real question as to whether any radical political organisation (or individual) in the here and now is actually capable of making things "worse" or "better" (whatever that means). This is a massive overestimation of our power to influence change on a gigantic and complex system.

Revolutions are complex events and hardly ever conform to the model of things get bad, people get angry, get armed and then overthrow power. Economic conditions are obviously a massive contributing factor but it is also a very political event and most revolutions have had before them some process of the de legitimisation of the state's power (failed wars, inability to halt crisis etc.). In situations where the state is capable of reacting in an authoritarian way it does not serve to increase class consciousness but has successfully subdued it.

I disagree with your analysis of the role of revolutionary organisations. It is a place for revolutionaries to propagate, educate and organise (and to be ready to appeal to the new constituency that explodes out of economic crisis). It is not it's role to "make" revolution.

[politics student]

Cut off the oil supply for a month and watch the proletarian turn to revolution when their creature comforts dry up.

[freakazoid]

This is a massive overestimation of our power to influence change on a gigantic and complex system.

"...nuclear warfare is not necesary to cause a breakdown of our society. You take a large city like Los Angeles, New York, Chicago- their water supply comes from a hundred miles away and any interuption of that, or food, or power for any period of time you're going to have riots in the streets. Our society is so fragile, so dependent on the interworking of things to provide us goods and services, that you don't need nuclear warfare to fragment us anymore than the Romans needed it to cause their eventual downfall." - Gene Roddenberry

What Passmore says is true. And I had discussed this in my original post.


I disagree with your analysis of the role of revolutionary organisations. It is a place for revolutionaries to propagate, educate and organise (and to be ready to appeal to the new constituency that explodes out of economic crisis). It is not it's role to "make" revolution.

What do you think propagating, educating, and organising the people is doing? That IS making the revolution. Yes, it is up to us to create the conditions necessary for a revolution to take place.

[danyboy27]

i dont support the whole thing, i dont like violence, but i have to say this thing might work. its all based on SUN TZU art of war.

disinformation, manipulation and other tricks like that been succesfully used by the soviet union and the united state to manipulate regimes abroad.

but personally, being implicated would mean, becoming something i hate, and i am affraid i would become like those dinosaurs

[politics student]

i dont support the whole thing, i dont like violence, but i have to say this thing might work. its all based on SUN TZU art of war.

disinformation, manipulation and other tricks like that been succesfully used by the soviet union and the united state to manipulate regimes abroad.

but personally, being implicated would mean, becoming something i hate, and i am affraid i would become like those dinosaurs

I hate violence but I support violence in some cases a revolution for example or self defense.

"I never heard you complain about me killing when I saved you from those men."

V for Vendetta (I must watch that film again)

Personally I have been reading lots on guerrilla warfare, Power to the people in the form of a peoples army who fights only on its terms.

[RaiseYourVoice]

This is mad, nothing else. You want to cut of major cities water supplies? You want to kill innocent people because revolutionary organisations don't manage to pursade anyone.

For a revolution you have two major conditions. First there are objective conditions like loosing a war, hunger crisis, natural disasters that make major parts of the population loose all their trust in the current government / system. That is happening with or without us, it can't just be brought by revolutionaries. If communist destroy supplies then its communists who will be blamed for it, not the state. If the system gets endangered by a move like that it will be the fash overtaking not us.

The second condition is the subjective one. The education, organisation and awareness of the working class and its allied classes. THAT is the job of revolutionaries. We need to gain trust, show our skills, convince of our politics. NOT destroy trust with terrorist acts.

Only and ONLY if the two come together a socialist revolution can be succesfull. And actually you are totally confusing the problem, the objective conditions are on their way in large parts of the world, without us helping any. In my country (germany) large parts of the population lost trust in the government, its wars, its reforms and even the system itself. I guess that can be said for many countries. The subjective condition is the problem! There isn't any class-war based organisation large enough, good enough organised and trusted enough to bring about revolutionary change. Actually not even to make people strike, to make people organise in unions, to make people go on the streets etc. All we see is sponatious, unorganised action. Sometimes blockades, sometimes even clashes with the police, but that won't lead anywhere progressive!

In fact on the one hand people are fed up with things, on the other hand racism is on the rise, 200.000 people go cheering at obama asking for more troops in afganistan, the army is more accepted than ever, there is no resistance to our upcoming police state etc.

Apart from your idea being mad (you want to risk the lives of your friends and family? of yourself? of many working class people out there? cuz believe me, not one capitalist is going to die of water shortage...) it is counter productive to any revolutionary organisation. Dont try to make up for the weakness of the revolutionary left by trying to change our role in the world, it doesn't work that way.

[Sam_b]

believe that things do need to get worse, but it must be worse fast. For if it is slow the people will simply adjust and become accustomed to it

Wow, what a great attitude. So the stupid workers will only start getting politicised and revolutionary if they keep getting oppressed :rolleyes:This is a patrionising and unprincipled analysis.

And i'm sorry for the one-liner, but its all the response that this deserves.

[politics student]

There is another way without making life worse for everyone.

Education Education Education.

A movement to inform the workers to the cause and the oppression they suffer would be an excellent start to the revolution.

[freakazoid]

This is mad, nothing else. You want to cut of major cities water supplies? That would be part of it, and I explain why.


You want to kill innocent people because revolutionary organisations don't manage to pursade anyone.Where do I say I want to kill innocent people?



For a revolution you have two major conditions. First there are objective conditions like loosing a war, hunger crisis, natural disasters that make major parts of the population loose all their trust in the current government / system. That is happening with or without us, it can't just be brought by revolutionaries.Yeah, these can also bring it about. That is what my idea is supposed to do, cause the population to loose all their trust in the current government/system. And a hunger crises and the effects of a natural disaster are some of the things discussed.


If communist destroy supplies then its communists who will be blamed for it, not the state.I discuss this problem.


If the system gets endangered by a move like that it will be the fash overtaking not us.This too.


The second condition is the subjective one. The education, organisation and awareness of the working class and its allied classes. THAT is the job of revolutionaries. We need to gain trust, show our skills, convince of our politics.

Did you not read what I wrote? Remember the whole foundation and stuff?


There isn't any class-war based organisation large enough, good enough organised and trusted enough to bring about revolutionary change. Actually not even to make people strike, to make people organise in unions, to make people go on the streets etc.Something we need to work on, which I discuss. My foundation building is more in my militia thread, which I just realized I need to link, so here you go. http://www.revleft.com/vb/setting-up-militia-t54170/index.html?t=54170&


All we see is sponatious, unorganised action. Sometimes blockades, sometimes even clashes with the police, but that won't lead anywhere progressive!It can, especially if you can keep the momentum going. You have to have long term goals. Not just short term.


Wow, what a great attitude. So the stupid workers will only start getting politicised and revolutionary if they keep getting oppressedStraw man.

Why hasn't anyone who completely disagrees answered my list of 4 questions?

[RaiseYourVoice]

Where do I say I want to kill innocent people?
You said you want to cut of large cities water supplies, what do you think will happen? You want to "make things worse" what do you think will happen? Yes, people die. Murder and crime rates will rise, police repression will rise and during heat waves people die of thurst. Thats not a world i would want to live in.

I dont know where you live, but even as a class concious communist, i would beat the shit out of you if you shut down my towns water supply. "The people" that will have it worse includes me too, but you know what? i dont want things to be worse, they are bad enough. Luckily your plan will never have ANY resonance in todays communist movement, this kind of "plan" is NOT for the working class.


I discuss this problem.
You talk about it, you dont solve it. Same with all other problems.


A theory like that can only be devoloped by someone who has totally no connection to either his own life or the lifes of the working class. You are nothing but an armchair socialist combined with being mad, not being able to see the devastating consequences you are asking for.

[Led Zeppelin]

The official German Communist Party said the same thing, if the Nazis came to power the working-class would wake up and revolt...yeah, that didn't happen.

Instead they ended up getting shot.

[freakazoid]

You said you want to cut of large cities water supplies, what do you think will happen?

What do you think will happen in a revolution? People are going to die. So should we not even fight the capitalists now because some people will die? :confused:


You want to "make things worse" what do you think will happen? Yes, people die. Murder and crime rates will rise, police repression will rise and during heat waves people die of thurst. Thats not a world i would want to live in.

Yeah, and people will finally become pissed enough that they will do something about it.


You talk about it, you dont solve it. Same with all other problems.

I talk about why certain things are necessary and what to do about them. So yes, I do "solve" it. Also remember this is more like only part of a rough rough draft. It is not a complete work. Not everything is completely hashed out.


A theory like that can only be devoloped by someone who has totally no connection to either his own life or the lifes of the working class. You are nothing but an armchair socialist combined with being mad, not being able to see the devastating consequences you are asking for.

Oh please, :rolleyes:


The official German Communist Party said the same thing, if the Nazis came to power the working-class would wake up and revolt...yeah, that didn't happen.

I noticed that you still have failed to answer my 4 questions. Why? Are you avoiding them because you don't like the outcome?

Instead they ended up getting shot.

You see, now HERE is an actual counterpoint to my idea. And I would be interested in hearing more.

[Random Precision]

You're making what is perhaps the oldest error in revolutionary politics. The Narodniks in Russia thought that increased repression from the autocracy would cause the peasants to revolt, so they assassinated a tsar. No revolt happened, and in fact the peasants who they thought would rally to their cause turned against them. The Comintern thought a Nazi government in Germany would cause the German proletariat to revolt- "after Hitler, our turn." But the workers failed to revolt and the Communists were persecuted- the rest is history.

See, the masses do not respond well to unstable conditions of life. Increasing repression makes them less likely to revolt. Revolutionaries must help the masses grow firm in the knowledge of their own power by helping them fight for better conditions. Only this growing momentum is capable of ending in a revolution.

[freakazoid]

Which is why I think it is very important to build a solid foundation. Which is talked more about in my militia thread.

[Bilan]

Only temporarilly worse.

The object of revolutionaries is to make life better. Not worse, at any point, for the working class.
Period.




To there own destruction.

That is exactly what the German Communist Party tried. It failed miserably, and there's a reason why:
The approach is completely wrong.

(Though, I'll accept that the conditions surrounding that were quite different, and had the Spanish Revolution been successful, their might have been a drastic change in the state of affairs)



I know that you disagree with what I am proposing. But do you disagree with the reason for what I am proposing;

1. That the people are too complacent and need to be radicalized.

It's not as much complacency as apathy and powerlessness.
It's "I don't think we can change", not "I don't want it to change"



2. That a reform here and a reform there is nothing but a tool of the bourgeois to passify the people.
[quote]

Of course. That's the nature of the bourgeois system.

[quote]
3. That the things can slowly get worse and worse and the people will not revolt because it is a gradual change, the whole frog in a pot example.


People =/= Frogs in a pot.
Further, things are terrible already - there is a growing, and widening wealth gap. That needs to be capitalized on by organized revolutionaries, and to spark against whats occurring, not to perpetuate it!



4. That if things got really worse for some reason the people would start to take notice and radicalize and do things that they would normally not do.


And if they find out its the revolutionary left, being complete idiots?
Then what?
This is like the "big lie for political motivations"



I look at this and can come to the only conclusion that we need to make things worse so as to make them better. But again this has to be completely planned out, have to have our foundation.

No. Things need to change dramatically now, as things are getting worse.
The absence of a coherent resistance to the changing global state of affairs, and even on a domestic level, is a major problem; more so than this crapola you're talking about.
Most people are struggling for the basics; to afford housing, clothing, food, etc.
Why make it harder? That's cruel, and just blatantly wrong. We should never, ever support that.


Dude I agree 1,000%. And when everyone gets angry, it's just gonna be fucking righteous. We're gonna storm congress. Storm the white house. Storm the Exxon Building. Storm the Blackwater Building. Storm the UN. Storm all the buildings. Take the power back. Get fucking violent. We know it;s not a video game. I've been ready for this revolution. The 60's were great. And peace may have done a lot. But violence is the only answer for the 21st century.

How can you in your right mind call yourself an anarcho-syndicalist!?

[Random Precision]

So basically your plan amounts to trying to trick the working class into having a revolution. Don't think it works like that, sorry.

[Sam_b]

Straw man.


No, just unprincipled and unsocialist bullshit on your part.

[RedAnarchist]

By tricking the people into revolution, you are no better than the priests who trick the people into obeying god. The people must understand the revolution and they must participate in it freely. We are not prophets and we will not lead people to the "promised land".

[freakazoid]

There is another way without making life worse for everyone.

Education Education Education.

A movement to inform the workers to the cause and the oppression they suffer would be an excellent start to the revolution.Sorry for missing this earlier. My militia thread, the part that should come before this idea, is all about education and helping the people, much like the Black Panthers. This would be the crating the foundation.


Increasing repression makes them less likely to revolt.That certainly wasn't seen during the Vietnam war.


Revolutionaries must help the masses grow firm in the knowledge of their own power by helping them fight for better conditions. This is done too. And is explained more in my militia thread.


The object of revolutionaries is to make life better. Not worse, at any point, for the working class.
Period.So life is going to be better when it turns into a revolution?


You're making what is perhaps the oldest error in revolutionary politics. The Narodniks in Russia thought that increased repression from the autocracy would cause the peasants to revolt, so they assassinated a tsar. No revolt happened, and in fact the peasants who they thought would rally to their cause turned against them. The Comintern thought a Nazi government in Germany would cause the German proletariat to revolt- "after Hitler, our turn." But the workers failed to revolt and the Communists were persecuted- the rest is history.
That is exactly what the German Communist Party tried. It failed miserably, and there's a reason why:
The approach is completely wrong.Before you even begin to do this there must be a very strong foundation. With a large and solid enough foundation you won't have to worry about it failing. I'm interested in hearing about how large, organized, influential, and liked the leftists where during that time.


It's not as much complacency as apathy and powerlessness.
It's "I don't think we can change", not "I don't want it to change"Well, I should of said to apathetic and complacent. edit - I edited it to show that now, :)


People =/= Frogs in a pot.I believe it does apply in this situation. People do the same thing. Just look at how bad things are now. Think like what is happening over in Britain with there bans on firearms and knives. If they went straight to knives and banned everything more people would of noticed. But since they started slowly they can slowly ban everything without a big fight.


Further, things are terrible already - there is a growing, and widening wealth gap.Yeah, but it is happening to slowly.


And if they find out its the revolutionary left, being complete idiots?
Then what?What I meant but normally not due is the working class people would start to revolt, something they wouldn't due under normal conditions. And to respond to what I think you thought I was saying, I already explained that the original post.


No. Things need to change dramatically now, as things are getting worse.Couldn't agree with you more.


Why make it harder?I explained this. :(


So basically your plan amounts to trying to trick the working class into having a revolution. Don't think it works like that, sorry.What do you mean, trick them into a revolution?


No, just unprincipled and unsocialist bullshit on your part.No. I never called nor do I believe that the workers are stupid. I have explained quite clearly on why I have come to my conclusions and why I think this is the correct course of action. You haven't explained any of you reasoning. Which I had asked in my first post for responders to refrain from.


The people must understand the revolution and they must participate in it freely.Yeah. Remember, the whole foundation thing? edit - Not meant to sound sarcastic or anything if it comes off that way.


We are not prophets and we will not lead people to the "promised land".What are you talking about? This isn't about some "prophets" leading the people to the promised land. Sometimes when I talk about stuff like this, like in the militia thread, of being called things like that or I think the workers are to stupid to do things themselves. Are we not workers ourselves? How can we be working in place of the workers when we are part of the workers?

I think you people seem to be forgetting that this only comes AFTER building a very strong and solid foundation. Without that you would get no where.

[Sam_b]

You haven't explained any of you reasoning.

For starters (and comrades have already gone into the history about why your position is wrong) it is the idea that only if things get much worse workers will realise they are getting exploited.

I'm sorry if I did troll, but I struggle to take anyone seriously who suggests that we need to set up conditions for the fascist BNP to get into power :rolleyes:

[freakazoid]

and comrades have already gone into the history about why your position is wrong

Well, they've gone a little into it but I would appreciate more.


it is the idea that only if things get much worse workers will realise they are getting exploited.

Which I have explained my reasonings for. And I would be interested in hearing your personal opinion. :)


I'm sorry if I did troll, but I struggle to take anyone seriously who suggests that we need to set up conditions for the fascist BNP to get into power

Apology accepted, :). It's understandable though, I wasn't expecting to win any popularity contests with this thread. But it isn't just about getting them into power, which it doesn't have to be "fascist" just authoritarian, it is them getting into power so things get worse fast before people can get confortable to them that way people will revolt.

[Bilan]

Before you even begin to do this there must be a very strong foundation. With a large and solid enough foundation you won't have to worry about it failing. I'm interested in hearing about how large, organized, influential, and liked the leftists where during that time.

It's simply not logical. You'd turn everyone against the revolution.



I believe it does apply in this situation. People do the same thing. Just look at how bad things are now. Think like what is happening over in Britain with there bans on firearms and knives. If they went straight to knives and banned everything more people would of noticed. But since they started slowly they can slowly ban everything without a big fight.

And look at the absence of an organized revolutionary left, with coherent politics, which are down to earth and involved in the day to day struggles of the working class, in their communities and work places.



Yeah, but it is happening to slowly.


Irrelevant. The speed is not what counts, how we approach it and fight it is.



What I meant but normally not due is the working class people would start to revolt, something they wouldn't due under normal conditions. And to respond to what I think you thought I was saying, I already explained that the original post.

I read your original post, and I think its completely wrong.
You are forcing people to revolt on false pretences, and infact, lying to them.
If you really feel capitalism is so fucked, and know it, you don't have to make people suffer more to prove it.
I have a feeling you're quite disconnected from the working class, and from the revolutionary left. Am I right?




What do you mean, trick them into a revolution?

You know what it means, dude. You're advocating the construction of a lie to bring down capitalism. It's blatant manipulation and detrimental to the revolutionary movement.



No. I never called nor do I believe that the workers are stupid. I have explained quite clearly on why I have come to my conclusions and why I think this is the correct course of action. You haven't explained any of you reasoning. Which I had asked in my first post for responders to refrain from.


If you don't believe it, don't treat us like it!

[freakazoid]

It's simply not logical. You'd turn everyone against the revolution.

While I do not believe it would turn people against the revolution, because it would be unveiling how f'd up the current system it, I would be interested in hearing an alternative rout.


You are forcing people to revolt on false pretences, and infact, lying to them.

How is showing them how the system truly is lying to them?


I have a feeling you're quite disconnected from the working class, and from the revolutionary left. Am I right?

No?


You know what it means, dude.

No, I don't.


You're advocating the construction of a lie to bring down capitalism.

What I said before, how is showing them how the system truly is lying to them?


If you don't believe it, don't treat us like it!

How am I treating the workers like they are stupid?

Plus, I have been thinking more into the larger picture of my ideas, this thread is only about one part of them, and I have been thinking that this whole part might even be unnecessary. If the foundation is large enough doing all this might not be needed. But I need to put more thought into it.

[Sam_b]

How am I treating the workers like they are stupid?


Because you seemingly refuse to aknowledge that workers can be politicised and motivated, and instead need to "show them how the system truly is" by advocating that fascists and anti-working class elements make the current system much worse for workers.

Thus for me this is an attack on the working class and not revolutionary in the slightest.

[Bilan]

While I do not believe it would turn people against the revolution, because it would be unveiling how f'd up the current system it, I would be interested in hearing an alternative rout.

Syndicalism is one alternative.
There's a whole history to prove it's merit in struggle.




How is showing them how the system truly is lying to them?


How are you truly showing them the system whilst your dictating it's nature by chaotically disrupting it in a way that will have detrimental repercussions on the working class?
The true nature of the system is constant.



No?

Apologies if that came off as presumptuous or offensive, but it's truly a bizarre politic.




How am I treating the workers like they are stupid?

You don't recognize their ability to organize under the current state of affairs and rise up against it, whilst there's the whole history of the working class and its struggles to prove otherwise.
By negating the importance of organization over destruction, and by forcing the workers into a trap (not to mention destitution and poverty), you're doing just that.



Plus, I have been thinking more into the larger picture of my ideas, this thread is only about one part of them, and I have been thinking that this whole part might even be unnecessary. If the foundation is large enough doing all this might not be needed. But I need to put more thought into it.

It's indeed unnecessary. And definite thought needs to go into it.

Even if you remain an insurrectionary anarchist, there are definitely texts out there to give you a more class struggle approach to your politics (which is extremely important).
Check out the way the insurrectionaries in Spain organized and resisted (A good text is Durruti: The People Armed, which shows alot of the ways in which Durruti used methods of insurrectionary action to attack the bourgeoisie, etc)

[freakazoid]

Because you seemingly refuse to aknowledge that workers can be politicised and motivated,

Did I ever say that that isn't a good tactic also? How did you expect the foundation to form?


and instead need to "show them how the system truly is" by advocating that fascists and anti-working class elements make the current system much worse for workers.

Are you saying that those things don't make it worse?



Syndicalism is one alternative.
There's a whole history to prove it's merit in struggle.

Part of the foundation building, see first post.


How are you truly showing them the system whilst your dictating it's nature by chaotically disrupting it in a way that will have detrimental repercussions on the working class?

It wouldn't be dictating its nature.


Apologies if that came off as presumptuous or offensive, but it's truly a bizarre politic.

Thats ok, :)


You don't recognize their ability to organize under the current state of affairs and rise up against it,

Thats not it. I do believe the workers can be organized, which I touched on slightly about being part of the foundation building earlier this post. The purpose of this tactic is more to wake up the rest of the people, the more apathetic. But like I said in my last post, this might not be necessary because the foundation building itself could possibly set things in motion so much that it would negate this needing to be done.


Even if you remain an insurrectionary anarchist, there are definitely texts out there to give you a more class struggle approach to your politics (which is extremely important).
Check out the way the insurrectionaries in Spain organized and resisted (A good text is Durruti: The People Armed, which shows alot of the ways in which Durruti used methods of insurrectionary action to attack the bourgeoisie, etc)

Sweet thanks, :) I have heard this Durruti person mentioned before but I don't know anything about him. Was he an insurrectionary anarchist? Will definitely look into it. Know of a link where I can read the text?

[Bilan]

Part of the foundation building, see first post.

The foundation, in this case, is far far more important, and indeed, negates the necessity of the activity's your proposing.
The syndicalist union is a method of organization and unity for the working class against the bosses, and also a method of action and struggle.
It is a means to an end.




It wouldn't be dictating its nature.

You'd be fundamentally altering a standard continuation in favour of detrimental attacks on the infrastructure which serves the working class.
I can see why you'd be appealing to it, but it's not the right way.




Thats not it. I do believe the workers can be organized, which I touched on slightly about being part of the foundation building earlier this post. The purpose of this tactic is more to wake up the rest of the people, the more apathetic. But like I said in my last post, this might not be necessary because the foundation building itself could possibly set things in motion so much that it would negate this needing to be done.

You'll have the opposite effect, especially when they realize it's the revolutionaries doing this.





Sweet thanks, :) I have heard this Durruti person mentioned before but I don't know anything about him. Was he an insurrectionary anarchist? Will definitely look into it. Know of a link where I can read the text?

He was an anarcho-syndicalist, but prior to the Spanish Civil War, he was involved in insurrectionary activities (Such as killing pistoleros, etc. and made an attempt to assassinate the King of Spain).
That is the old style of insurrectionary anarchism: Direct action combined with class struggle politics.

Modern insurrectionary tactics reflect to much of the insanity of your position (With all due respect).

[JimmyJazz]

I think the main thing wrong with this idea is the fetishizing of revolution as an end in itself. If I am a revolutionary, in theory, it's because I see no way to achieve my ends of a democratic socialist society within the narrow confines of "representative" parliamentarism. But what makes you think that a revolution in the U.S. or England, at this actual historical moment, would result in a society any better than what we have now? It seems likely that a revolution right now would result in a more right-wing society than we have now.

Marx's theory of immiseration is much more specific. True, the revolution he predicted would be a result of increasingly bad conditions, but he foresaw a revolution that would be overturning specifically those conditions that were making things bad for people--those related to capitalist production. You can't turn this into a more general theory about bad conditions leading to good revolution. If you don't have a specific reason to believe that a revolution in your time and place would produce something better instead of something worse, then hell, you should probably even be afraid of revolution.

[Black Dagger]

Moved to learning.

[#FF0000]

There is another way without making life worse for everyone.

Education Education Education.

A movement to inform the workers to the cause and the oppression they suffer would be an excellent start to the revolution.

I agree 100% with this.

Revolutions don't happen because things are bad, but because they're beginning to get better. Once people realize that they can make change on their own.

[freakazoid]

But what makes you think that a revolution in the U.S. or England, at this actual historical moment, would result in a society any better than what we have now?

If this was to happen it wouldn't be right now, there are things that have to happen first, the things that I was saying could very well negate this step.

[OI OI OI]

In case this has not been said before , revolutionaries don't create revolutionary situations.
It is capitalism that creates them and the masses themselves.
Revolutionaries only prepare for revolution and show the way forward .
Nothing more and nothing less.

[Wake Up]

Cut off the oil supply for a month and watch the proletarian turn to revolution when their creature comforts dry up.

Thing is though what would make them turn to a leftist position, whether it be anarchist or Marxist?

Marxist and anarchist ideologies are so far away from the average person's mind (in the West at least) that a revisionist party with a green/alternative energy platform, in this case, would probably win over a revolutionary one.


We need to work around dispelling myths and educating people on leftist positions, show them how abused they are at the moment and simultaneously give them a solution. Showing people the truth is all that needs to be done.

Well to create a proper proletarian revolution that is, if you just want to lead an angry mob and eventually abuse the position of power then by all means make things worse, because thats the only thing that would happen if the OP's method is to be carried out.

[freakazoid]

We need to work around dispelling myths and educating people on leftist positions, show them how abused they are at the moment and simultaneously give them a solution. Showing people the truth is all that needs to be done.

Which is what the first step is.


Well to create a proper proletarian revolution that is, if you just want to lead an angry mob and eventually abuse the position of power then by all means make things worse, because thats the only thing that would happen if the OP's method is to be carried out.

lols no. I think you are forgetting that this is only one part of a much larger plan.

[Wake Up]

Which is what the first step is.



lols no. I think you are forgetting that this is only one part of a much larger plan.

Well I believe that if enough people are educated then their would be no need to perform some kind of trigger activity as the revolution would start almost spontaneously.
Say if half the proletariat were anarchists. Would their be any need whatsever for a militant minority to bomb the blackwater building as you put it? Of course not, that number of proletariats could easily bring the state down with strikes and rallies. It is the threat of violence behind the strikes and rallies that works. Thats is why Martin Luther King succeeded - A peaceful revolt with the shadow of a black fist behind it, or however he put it.

What do you ope to achieve by participating in what the state will label as terrorism? Even if you cause problems it is not certain that the reaction will be one of sympathy towards the leftist cause. In fact their is a chance the leftist cause will loose out as the state labels us terrorists and introduces a revisionist plan.

We educate people over the anarchist position, then once enough people are educated things will start to happen spontaneously, those thing swill be rallies and mass strikes with the threat of violence behind them. If the state calls our bluff then we can use violence.

The above is how it must be done.

[Q]

I haven't read through the whole thread, so I'm sorry if this point has already been made. The underlying reason to supporting a strategy in "making things worse" is that working class people will at "some point" automagically see the light and demand social revolution. This is a grave error.

Revolutionary consciousness doesn't just fall out of the sky, it's the culmination of long fought struggles, with wins and losses. It is this process that builds up a combatative working class movement. What Marxists in this process try to do is fight along with the movement to win and boost confidense in the workers' own power as a class. But we also raise the point that any gain now is only temporary under capitalism and the bosses will wait for their most opportune moment and strike back when that time comes. The only solution to ensure all temporary gains is the socialist revolution.

The strategy of "helping the capitalist in making things worse" only accomplishes in undermining the workers' confidense, so in turn they don't learn the vital lessons that can only be learned in class struggle. It is therefore an extremely reactionary strategy, even more so because working class people will look towards the left for solutions, only to be disappointed and disillusioned by betrayal.