Weaponed resistance

[Drako]

hi comrades,

I just wanted to ask you, how you think about weaponed resistance,
just like several groups in the 60s-90s did.

Drako

[Wanted Man]

Well, they failed for a reason. A small group of radicals who bomb stuff and kill important people. Contrary to their expectations, the masses were not inspired by such actions and did not revolt. The machinery of the state, the media, etc. is actually so strong that such actions are more likely to make people believe that "they might be next" and that they need more state control to protect them from the feared "terrorists".

That doesn't mean armed revolution is wrong. But a kind of 'urban guerrilla' like that has proven to be unworkable.

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

I understand their intentions and support them, but I fear Wanted Man is right regarding to the consequences.

[Vendetta]

What exactly do you mean by weaponed resistance? The small cell groups that WM is talking about? If so, I agree with WM.

[Drako]

it would not be exactly the same.
ok, I am talking about a small group,
in that case, we are talking about the same.

The difference lies in the backgrounds of the group.
Many of these groups made mistakes like acting against the civilisation.
Or subgroups attacked targets which didn't match the main line of the group.
There are many things, that should not have happened.

The most important thing is:
The group must not be a group representing a minority.
A group, that wants to be successfull, needs lots of sympathisants, that are not actually part of the group.
These people will help the group to hide from the police.
And these people will go on, when the original group is not able to do so.

That is, what the first generaton of the RAF did.
Very much people stood behind them.
The reason, why all stopped were the mistakes of the second and the third generation.

[Forward Union]

hi comrades,

I just wanted to ask you, how you think about weaponed resistance,
just like several groups in the 60s-90s did.

Drako

You mean armed resistance like the RAF?

[Drako]

ofcourse, I do.

I thought armed and weaponed means the same.
So sorry, if I was wrong.

[OI OI OI]

These are ridiculus anti-Leninist tactics.

We saw from history that all these groups failed consistently.

From the Narodniks, to the FARC and other terrorist, guerilla groups that spring up like mushrooms.

And when they are successfull in overthrowing capitalism, due to the military structure of the vanguard, with no democracy and strict hierarchy, they fail to create a democratic workers state.

Instead they create a Stalinist monstrosity .

I am very much against these groups as I see that these tactics have failed and have no future.

Only leftists with low theoretical level, fetishize an armed guerilla with an AK-47 on the mountains.

The supporters of these tactics are dissilutioned radicals who have lost faith in the working class and they see it as apathetic . They fail to understand the objective material conditions that make the working class "apathetic" for some period of time.


So they go to the mountains thinking that only them are revolutionary, not only revolutionary but super-revolutionary.

Isolated fromt he masses they fight for a period(10,20 ,40 years) and they accomplish nothing , while honest activists lose their lives for nothing.

Instead they could put all this energy to organize unions in the cities fight for workers rights and when the time is right make a real workers revolution that has prospects to establish workers democracy.

[ahab]

armed revolution is the only way

[al8]

I don't have really anything against it. Somebody has to take the first step. And I'm not juging those that do. Besides it can be very cheerful to know of such dilligent groups as the RAF. My possition is that any and all forms of resistence are always justified.

[YourMuDoIsWeak]

I for one support such a armed resistance and corp of "hard" individuals dedicated to a revolution and i am also for millitantly checking and fighting armed fascist/super nationalist groups. One thing though that is paramount to this is the belief that those who do such things should consider themselves as weapons of the people and should not expect any thing in return or social standing for their actions just because i want to fight does not mean my actions are more revolutionary than those who choose more peaceful alternatives.

I also believe that as a weapon of the people during the revoltution that people like me should bury our guns so to speak forget about it and carry on with our lives, this is much easier said than done of course as the horrors of armed conflict are blood, stressful and most importantly horrifyingly traumatizing. if comrades choose to approach this form of armed revolution we must understand that any succesful military operation requires discipline and obedience to follow order to a certain degree, if such things are not met objectives may cost the lives of even more comrades or even failure.

You see i suggest that we create a semi proffesional corp of individuals pulling from members who have prior military expirience especially of those in the combat arms field and medical corps. Also given this route as a Anarchist Communist i am ends on how to succesfullt structure the group without usurping individual authority..

Upon pondering upon that i realized that militaries require authority to work, so i suggest we create a structure of consensus between 4 groups the average combantant, squad leaders, platoon leaders, and company size leaders. All for groups will fight there would be no non combantants.
5 men to a squad including squad leader
30 men to a platoon inclunding platoon leader
120 men to a company including a company leader

Decisions would be made like this the squad leaders talk to the comrades they are assigned to guide he then meets with fellow squad leaders and discusses with them what needs to be done. After that stage a common consensus should be made, then out of the platoon 3 regular combatants are chosen at random by a squad leaders who do not guide them to attend a discussion with the platoon leader. So within the discussion between the platoon leader their should be the platoon leader 6 squad leaders and 3 regular combants who should come to a common consenus to bring to the attention of the company leader.

Mass Company movements would not have a battalion leader but strategy would be made by having the company leaders coming together with 2 random squad leaders and 4 regular combantants to ensure no one gets shitted on. this also ensure that if the discussions were attacked or raided their would still be people with knowledge to help make decision.

all should study military studies and leaders should be rotated from regular combantants every 3 months.

[freakazoid]

I think that what Drako said about the background of the group and stuff is how it should be.


ofcourse, I do.

I thought armed and weaponed means the same.
So sorry, if I was wrong.While you could use them interchangeably, people generally use the phrase armed resistance. But I see that you are from Germany so the confusion is understandable.


Only leftists with low theoretical level, fetishize an armed guerilla with an AK-47 on the mountains.Speaking of AKs I just bought a folding Yugo AK, :P Once Obama becomes elected don't expect to find firearms like these on the cheap, if at all. :(

EDIT - YourMuDoIsWeak posted up right before I posted mine. I like you, :D The only thing I can think of that I disagree with is the rotating of the "leaders". And that is because someone should be "leader" that is knowledgeable about things like tactics and what not. There is a saying that goes "Does it follow that I reject all authority? Perish the thought! In the case of boots, I defer to the authority of the bootmaker" I don't remember who said it, I think Bakunin maybe. But the point is that they are "leader" because they have authoritative knowledge on the subject and if you rotate all the time you would be removing someone who does have knowledge on tactics and whatnot and putting someone who doesn't in, and plus they wouldn't be able to hone there skills because they aren't in it long enough. Of course things should still remain democratic. An interesting note is that the FBI's HRT, Hostage Rescue Team, has no leader, I believe that it is the HRT group. And the reason is because they all are so knowledgeable on what they do have trained so much together that they know what needs to be done.

[Knight of Cydonia]

if such group exist in my hometown....hell yeah i would support by being a member...

[Forward Union]

I would not join and would condem their tactics.

[Knight of Cydonia]

I would not join and would condem their tactics.
and why is that?

[Red October]

Revolution isn't made by a small group of people with guns shooting public officials and businessmen. Revolution is made through mass action and organizing by the working class itself.

[Forward Union]

and why is that?

Because it has nothing to do with taking over the means of production and the organisation of the masses of people. It's tactically useless, if we can get influence in key sections of the economy, we can excersise leaverage over the economy, and begin to effect change.

If a bunch of nutters bomb a police station we'd achieve nothing but iscolation. Not that I object to the bombing of a police station in principal, I just don't think it's tactically usefulll.

It's just a group of extreamists fullfilling their ramboesque fantasies. And I militantly object to it.

The amount of ordinance you would need to actually physically destroy all the mechanisms of state yourself would be so immence. We'd be talking acres of land to store the explosives. And the likelihood of being able to continue you bombing campaign for more than a year.... the size of your paramillitary would obviously be very small, and incapable of adapting and engaging with the regular army. You'd get *****slapped back to the stone age. It'd be like watching a car crash.

[freakazoid]

The amount of ordinance you would need to actually physically destroy all the mechanisms of state yourself would be so immence. We'd be talking acres of land to store the explosives.

First of all no. And second of all, what does it matter how much room it would take to store things?:confused:


the size of your paramillitary would obviously be very small, and incapable of adapting and engaging with the regular army. You'd get *****slapped back to the stone age.

Again, no.

[Forward Union]

[quote=freakazoid;1255168]First of all no. And second of all, what does it matter how much room it would take to store things?:confused:[/qote]

Because owning a small arms cache is incredibly difficult, you might go unoticed owning a gun or two, but try an organisie forming a stash, and you start to draw attention. The ammount of explosives, firearms, ammunition and proper casing, enough to destroy the millitary, police, courts, and special forces would be epic. And thre's no way you could even attain it without getting noticed.

And even if you didn't, you might get away with a few bombings. And after that you'd be up against the entire US state, paramilitaries, police, and hordes of ordinary people that are shit scared you're going to bomb them or their families.

[welshboy]

:crying:
not again

[FinnMacCool]

Armed resistance always has its time and its place, but that time is not now and that place certainly is not here!

[JimmyJazz]

YourMuDoIsWeak: I added you as a friend, please make me a platoon commander, tia.

[freakazoid]

Because owning a small arms cache is incredibly difficult, you might go unoticed owning a gun or two, but try an organisie forming a stash, and you start to draw attention.

It's not like once you have so large of an arms cache that all of a sudden out of no where a big sign appears in your yard saying that you have a large cache. You can easily do it with no one noticing.


The ammount of explosives, firearms, ammunition and proper casing, enough to destroy the millitary, police, courts, and special forces would be epic.

Wait, are you talking about personally owning enough to destroy EVERY military instillation yourself? If so then yeah, that would require a lot. But who ever suggested that?



And even if you didn't, you might get away with a few bombings. And after that you'd be up against the entire US state, paramilitaries, police, and hordes of ordinary people that are shit scared you're going to bomb them or their families.

And that is why you also organize the people, think like the Black Panthers, and every attack is done for a specific reason and you always have a communique explaining why it was done.


http://www.revleft.com/vb/../revleft/smilies2/crying.gif
not again

What else are us armchair revolutionaries going to do with our time? :D

[Forward Union]

It's not like once you have so large of an arms cache that all of a sudden out of no where a big sign appears in your yard saying that you have a large cache. You can easily do it with no one noticing.

Good luck.


Wait, are you talking about personally owning enough to destroy EVERY military instillation yourself? If so then yeah, that would require a lot. But who ever suggested that?

No one else is going o help you so it's going to have to be that.


And that is why you also organize the people, think like the Black Panthers, and every attack is done for a specific reason and you always have a communique explaining why it was done.

The black pather tactic worked in a specific context. I don't believe it would work today atall.

I don't object to militancy of course, we very much need it in a mass movement. But theres a difference between militancy and bombing things.


What else are us armchair revolutionaries going to do with our time? :D

Get involved in your union or residence association.

[bcbm]

And that is why you also organize the people, think like the Black Panthers, and every attack is done for a specific reason and you always have a communique explaining why it was done.

The Black Panthers were not a group engaged in armed struggle. They had arms for self-defense, sure, but they did not go out of their way to attack the police or government. Their primary function, as ours should be, was organizing their community and class.

[Rosa Provokateur]

Good intentions dont change the fact that its terrorism.

[bcbm]

Terrorism is meaningless newspeak.

[tehpevis]

To quote something RSOA said on unitedcomrades, "The Ballot or the Bullet"
I voted Option 1, but that would only be if an armed revolution starts in America. I'm not exactly getting off of my ass and Starting one right now lol

[Vendetta]

That's 'cause you're lazy. :p

Anyway, I'd give my best wishes of success to these sort of groups, but I don't really see them as changing much, unless there's some kinda large organization acting in concert with them (or directing them, who knows).

[ellipsis]

Speaking of AKs I just bought a folding Yugo AK, :P Once Obama becomes elected don't expect to find firearms like these on the cheap, if at all. :(


I recently purchased a Romanian WASR AK in anticipation of Obama's gun-grabbing and of course in case of revolution. I wish I had sprung for a nicer AK but what are you going to do. Clean that yugo well, i don't think that it has a chrome lined barrel.

I own several guns and train for guerrilla warfare not because I aspire to starting an insurgency, but because if the worst case scenario does happen and martial law is declared, labor camps are opened etc. I want to be able to resist tyranny.

Clearly we must learn from the mistakes of the past and develop a new model for armed revolutionary organizations. I look to the EZLN in this regard.

[Rosa Provokateur]

Terrorism is meaningless newspeak.
http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l279/babyfrat92/WTC.jpg

2,975 DEAD. REMEMBER KIDS: NEWSPEAK, MEANINGLESS NEWSPEAK KILLS

[bcbm]

You're using terrorism to describe all acts of armed resistance, which renders it a meaningless term. This is the strategy of the US government- ALL resistance is terrorism. Obviously murdering 3000 innocent people is terrorism, but to describe all forms of violent resistance as such is stupid.

[freakazoid]

Clean that yugo well, i don't think that it has a chrome lined barrel.

I've read that they don't, :( Oh well, I think that is the really only "bad" thing about them.

[The Douche]

I've read that they don't, :( Oh well, I think that is the really only "bad" thing about them.

Should've gotten the century arms! I just hope the gun laws last till april, otherwise I may never get an assault rifle. (be stuck with the mini 14)

[freakazoid]

Should've gotten the century arms!

Century Arms makes the Yugo, and they are supposed to be one of the best AKs out there. It's just that Yugos don't have chrome lined bores for some reason.


I just hope the gun laws last till april, otherwise I may never get an assault rifle. (be stuck with the mini 14)

Me too, I need to stock up on ammo. I wonder how long till Obama signs an anti-2A bill. I think the mini 14s are pretty popular ranch guns?

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

Armed resistance is definetely necessary against a right-wing dictatorship such as Colombia or the Philippines. In a capitalist western state, however, capitalist propaganda has the ability to turn the Working Class against the freedom fighters by spreading lies and creating an atmosphere of fear.

[ellipsis]

freakazoid, I have heard good things about century Yugos as well. I bought my century romanian WASR because it was cheap, but the front sight post is canted, so you have to have aim to the right significantly. there are many much nicer AKs than yours and mine, but to me that kinda defeat the point of the AK, which is a cheap, simple, reliable gun which gets the job done, no need to spend 600 bucks. also yes stockpile ammo because it isn't getting any cheaper. I have 800+ rounds of 7.62 x 39
on hand but which that i could also use more. and yes the mini-14 is a good ranch rifle, now they just market it as the "Ranch Rifle"

cmoney, of course you should get an assault rifle. my comrade and co-blogger just bite the bullet and threw down the cash for a Colt 6920, a rifle which you have intimate knowledge of. you can by a new stock for your mini-14 from TAPCO to make it more like an assault rifle.

[freakazoid]

I bought my century romanian WASR because it was cheap, but the front sight post is canted, so you have to have aim to the right significantly.

I hear that that is a common problem. Apparently a quick fix is to just bang on it with a hammer to straighten it lol. Got to love there durability.


also yes stockpile ammo because it isn't getting any cheaper. I

Funny thing is is that at the gun show that I got it at I was seeing boxes of Wolf ammo for $4.

[Reclaimed Dasein]

I'd like to disagree with the majority of posters here. Violence is pretty much always meaningful, the question about that meaning. I'm not so sure that revolutionary violence would have effect that anyone expects. Yet, that seems to be a very cautious argument for it.


Century Arms makes the Yugo, and they are supposed to be one of the best AKs out there. It's just that Yugos don't have chrome lined bores for some reason.

Yugoslavia doesn't have chrome deposits. After Tito's break with Stalin, Yugoslavian weapons were made heavier to compensate for not having chrome.

[Forward Union]

http://i98.photobucket.com/albums/l279/babyfrat92/WTC.jpg

2,975 DEAD. REMEMBER KIDS: NEWSPEAK, MEANINGLESS NEWSPEAK KILLS

BEst post evar?

[ellipsis]

I hear that that is a common problem. Apparently a quick fix is to just bang on it with a hammer to straighten it lol. Got to love there durability.

Funny thing is is that at the gun show that I got it at I was seeing boxes of Wolf ammo for $4.


I don't think that banging it with a hammer will work, other than to adjust the front sights. It is welded on there, I was reading about how to do it and you have to drill out the pins that hold it on there and adjust it.

four bucks a box for wolf isn't actually that bad. I see it for 5-6 bucks a box all the time. I bought a case of golden tiger for 200 bucks, so four bucks a box. before I ever owned a gun AK ammo was like 95 bucks a case, two bucks a box. I have even seen cases for like 270 and some gun stores and those were selling like hotcakes.

[Comrade Stern]

if done at the right time and the right place, violence can be very meaningful... but otherwise armed resistance is futile especially where the ruling class has a large military, in my opinion you must destroy them from within...politically, you must reveal the injustice and win the hearts of the people and then the people = the military... if the ruling class loses control of the people in the military then you must take control and exile the ruling class and their remaining supporters... then the next step is maintaining a true workers state

[DesertShark]

If you're going to do an armed resistance, you want weapons like this:
youtube.com/watch?v=iX6YvWxtrxw
(I can't hyperlink it because I don't have enough posts, so you'll have to copy and paste)

-DesertShark

[ellipsis]

such high tech/high cost/high maintenance weapons are ill-suited for guerrilla warfare, but yah a metal storm grenade launcher would be sweet

[The Douche]

freakazoid, I have heard good things about century Yugos as well. I bought my century romanian WASR because it was cheap, but the front sight post is canted, so you have to have aim to the right significantly. there are many much nicer AKs than yours and mine, but to me that kinda defeat the point of the AK, which is a cheap, simple, reliable gun which gets the job done, no need to spend 600 bucks. also yes stockpile ammo because it isn't getting any cheaper. I have 800+ rounds of 7.62 x 39
on hand but which that i could also use more. and yes the mini-14 is a good ranch rifle, now they just market it as the "Ranch Rifle"

cmoney, of course you should get an assault rifle. my comrade and co-blogger just bite the bullet and threw down the cash for a Colt 6920, a rifle which you have intimate knowledge of. you can by a new stock for your mini-14 from TAPCO to make it more like an assault rifle.

I've had the money to buy a good AR a couple times, but I'm not 21. So I have to wait until this upcoming April.

The mini 14 is relatively useless as a combat/survival rifle. Spare parts are only available through ruger direct, so no spare parts can be easily attained. You should have a complete parts kit for your weapon, if you don't, get on that, but its not really do-able for the mini, so its not worth having for anything other than a "ranch rifle". The tapco stock isn't bad, but I have no real reason to buy it, I don't need the gun to have bells and whistles, all you really need on a battle rifle is a reflex site of some sort and a flashlight. Plus the tapco stock does not have a buffer spring, which is something that is pretty necessary if you plan to fire more than one round in rapid succession.

[freakazoid]

I've had the money to buy a good AR a couple times, but I'm not 21.

You only have to be 21 to buy a handgun, or a class 3 item.


should have a complete parts kit for your weapon, if you don't, get on that,

Oh yeah, definitaly have to get spare parts stuff.

[The Douche]

You only have to be 21 to buy a handgun

This is actually a simplification of the written law. You need to be 21 in order to own what the state calls a regulated firearm which includes handguns and assault rifles, assault rifle being designated as anything which is capable of accepting high capacity magazines, having a bayonet lug, having a heat shroud, or having a barrel under 20 inches in length. Then it goes on to specify some weapons which are excluded, including the mini 14, m1 garand, and m1 carbine all of which I own/have owned.

AR15s however, are considered to be regulated firearms. With the exception of one single bushmaster model (which is not currently made, to my knowledge) and one single colt model (which is insanely over-priced) and both of those weapons have full length barrels and fixed stocks. Not to mention that it is not worth buying an "off the rack" AR when you can build a better one for cheaper by buying parts from different companies.

Trust me dude, I know a hell of a lot about ARs.

[KurtFF8]

These are ridiculus anti-Leninist tactics.

We saw from history that all these groups failed consistently.

From the Narodniks, to the FARC and other terrorist, guerilla groups that spring up like mushrooms.

And when they are successfull in overthrowing capitalism, due to the military structure of the vanguard, with no democracy and strict hierarchy, they fail to create a democratic workers state.

Instead they create a Stalinist monstrosity .

I am very much against these groups as I see that these tactics have failed and have no future.

Only leftists with low theoretical level, fetishize an armed guerilla with an AK-47 on the mountains.

The supporters of these tactics are dissilutioned radicals who have lost faith in the working class and they see it as apathetic . They fail to understand the objective material conditions that make the working class "apathetic" for some period of time.


So they go to the mountains thinking that only them are revolutionary, not only revolutionary but super-revolutionary.

Isolated fromt he masses they fight for a period(10,20 ,40 years) and they accomplish nothing , while honest activists lose their lives for nothing.

Instead they could put all this energy to organize unions in the cities fight for workers rights and when the time is right make a real workers revolution that has prospects to establish workers democracy.

I think you're taking these groups and their formations out of context. Example after example show that groups like the Weathermen or the RAF were not formed in isolation from mass resistance to the current structure, but on the contrary, in the midst of popular resistance. The formation of the groups was a sign of the increasing militancy of the resistance (and I'm not talking about the groups in general, but a general increase of violence by the masses, for example in the US, random "firebombs" increase significantly, and were not just by the Weathermen).

That's not to say that there weren't flaws in the structures and contexts of the groups themselves, but they certainly did feel a part of a growing militant resistance. Granted as history progressed and the masses instead became less militant in their resistance, the groups remained, and thus became more alienated and isolated.

I would say one of the problems with most of these groups is that they basically broke off from the mass movements from the start to basically fight "their own wars" even amidst a growing militant mass (I feel redundant here). For example one of the early criticisms of the Weathermen was that they were doing their acts "too soon" and should have instead kept working with mass organizations and radicalizing them, which retrospectively would have likely been much more successful than "going underground".

[Junius]

One thing I agree with Lenin is his criticisms of the Narodniks, the Nihilists and their 'revolution through the bomb.'

I think the class structure is the same today: the Narodniks were comprised of students and members of the liberal intelligentsia.

[freakazoid]

This is actually a simplification of the written law. You need to be 21 in order to own what the state calls a regulated firearm which includes handguns and assault rifles, assault rifle being designated as anything which is capable of accepting high capacity magazines, having a bayonet lug, having a heat shroud, or having a barrel under 20 inches in length. Then it goes on to specify some weapons which are excluded, including the mini 14, m1 garand, and m1 carbine all of which I own/have owned.

Do you live in California or something? Sounds sort of like the '94 Assault Weapons Ban. I'm pretty sure we don't have those laws in this state, I bought a CETME once before I was 21.

[The Douche]

Do you live in California or something? Sounds sort of like the '94 Assault Weapons Ban. I'm pretty sure we don't have those laws in this state, I bought a CETME once before I was 21.

Maryland. Our state law is essentially like the AWB, except that it still allows for AW to be imported to the state and it specifys (seemingly random) weapons that are excluded, namely those two specific ARs.

Though I believe it would be legal for me to go to a state where 18 year olds can purchase ARs and for me to buy one at a gun show.

[freakazoid]

Maryland. Our state law is essentially like the AWB, except that it still allows for AW to be imported to the state and it specifys (seemingly random) weapons that are excluded, namely those two specific ARs.

Dang that sucks. I wonder if there is grounds for a suit based on the Heller ruling?


Though I believe it would be legal for me to go to a state where 18 year olds can purchase ARs and for me to buy one at a gun show.

If not you could always buy one off of someone selling on the floor and not a vendor, no need to fill out paperwork, :D

[The Douche]

Dang that sucks. I wonder if there is grounds for a suit based on the Heller ruling?



If not you could always buy one off of someone selling on the floor and not a vendor, no need to fill out paperwork, :D

Private sale of of regulated weapons is illegal in md. So if I bought one private it would be a problem.

[freakazoid]

:blink: That sucks. Go to a gun show in another state where it isn't illegal. :)

[ellipsis]

Vermont has no permitting process for anything, Combat rifles are the same as rifles so walk in walk out with any gun you can pay for. concealed carry with no permit, open carry no permit, loaded handguns allowed in cars, etc.

building ARs from component parts is the way to go in my opinion as well, my comrade built a sweet rock river but since acquired a colt. he got high end peep sights but i wish he had the loot to throw down on an eotech ACOG.

[freakazoid]

Vermont sounds dreamy, :D Would be nice to move there someday.

[ellipsis]

Tis mighty nice to be able to shoot guns in your back yard without fear to the cops showing up or a neighbor catching a stray bullet. I am currently living in metropolitan Honolulu, so some backyard shooting sound might nice. The range that I go to is on VT fish and game property and a semi-well kept secret. It is free and never crowded. It is also down hill from an elementary school. Move to vermont, the more radicals leftists active in the state, the better.

[freakazoid]

If I didn't already have something else planned I very well probably would. And if for some reason it doesn't work... I just might.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I would be supportive, but not actually participating.

[ellipsis]

I would be supportive, but not actually participating.

it takes a great number of people to make a revolution happen, not just foot soldiers.

[LOLseph Stalin]

it takes a great number of people to make a revolution happen, not just foot soldiers.

What if I get shot by an idiot Nazi or something? O_O I want to live to see Communism happen.

[ellipsis]

Then you can be a courier or look out, etc. my point is that there are many people who work behind the scenes in revolutionary orgainzations.

[LOLseph Stalin]

Then you can be a courier or look out, etc. my point is that there are many people who work behind the scenes in revolutionary orgainzations.

Well good. I would be happy to work as one of the behind the scenes people.

[Melbourne Lefty]

Depends on what you do.

Take people from the community, and then use them to clean up that community, drugs etc.

Now THAT type of weaponised resistance would get the community on side.

I know people like drugs but the damage they do to some working class areas makes anyone who gets rid of them a hero.

And then viola, instant firebase of militant support.

Ok Im just throwing shit up but its midnight where I live I need to get to bed damnit...:lol:

[thinkerOFthoughts]

hmmm... (I did not bother reading all the posts I just wanna put in my two cents :) ) Living in America I personally don't see a reason to have a armed revolution or anything like that... America is set up in such a way that tho it may take a while and may be very annoying to try an acomplish you can change the government through peaceful means.. besides I am against violence (unless it is very, very necessary and I mean VERY!)

[Post-Something]

hmmm... (I did not bother reading all the posts I just wanna put in my two cents :) ) Living in America I personally don't see a reason to have a armed revolution or anything like that... America is set up in such a way that tho it may take a while and may be very annoying to try an acomplish you can change the government through peaceful means.. besides I am against violence (unless it is very, very necessary and I mean VERY!)

Ok, what you're proposing is Social Democracy. There are a number of major issues with this stance, and it's steadily dying out in the world today. You have to understand that when this is tried it fails, and every single party that stands for the working class, eventually gets sucked to the other side:

First of all, how do you view socialism? Would you still aim to create an egalitarian, or "equal" society? What is your end goal?

Secondly, how is it possible that the working class and the rich will conciliate to create socialism? Surely each class will act to protect their interests, and with globalisation becoming such a big issue, sections of the working class can sometimes get pampered and lose interest in class struggle.

Thirdly, isn't your socialist society full of class antagonisms? ie, the rich want lower wages, more profits ; the workers want more wages and security.

Fourth, won't the society have the market circle since its economic basis will be the free market? Therefore how can you maintain the reforms such as free health care when every now and then you have a a recession and you need to cut off on social programs?

Social democracy is a nice idea, and I actually took the same stance as you when I first came onto the board, but it doesn't work. The capitalists might allow your welfare state and national health care for a while, but as soon as they're no longer afraid of a socialist revolution they will take it all back. Look around you, Social democracy has been in retreat for 30 years. How exactly do you plan to reverse this trend? The answer is that the system itself must be abolished, and since the upper class aren't going just happily come onto our side, we have to fight for it.

[Rjevan]

I would support armed resistance because I think it's necessary if we succesfully want to deal with the fascists and a reactionary government.

[Invincible Summer]

I would support it, but only from the outside at first. I wouldn't want to get my loved ones into any danger until I really felt that the armed struggle needed my help.

I'm a pansy, I know.

[Armand Iskra]

I support armed resistance or rather armed struggle alongside parliamentary struggle as a primary force in destroying the rotten state; since it shows real resistance through the use of arms as well as the actual destruction of the enemy simply by the weapon being carried.

But armed struggle must be protracted and not of a hurrying way, most of struggles being conducted "in a hurry" end up in failures, for they have no mass support to be with as support and as a force; most of these people who conducted "in a hurry" were those people who got used to be trigger happy and not thinking of the struggle they envisioned and wanted to conduct.

And if i join in the struggle, perhaps I belong to the propaganda section, and I would have carried two basic weapons:
The pen and my revolver.

[Rangi]

I'm sorry if I seem rude but this all seems like some kind of teenage G.I. Joe schoolboy wet dream.

I hope all those people who voted 'yes' to armed insurrection have some kind of IP mask as voting in such a way would undoubtedly draw the attention to any or all of the agencies that monitor this site.

I myself could belong to a governmental security agency.

Has anyone here ever heard a grenade go off? I have. It almost made me shit my pants. Has anyone watched a friend die from a bullet wound to the stomach? I haven't but I would imagine there would be copious amounts of screaming and blood and anguish.

Do you really have the balls for this sort of stuff?

If you think that you are gonna organise an armed revolution from your Mum's house with the guys you play World of Warcraft with then may I be the first person to prick your little bubble of self delusion.

It isn't going to happen.

Mi5 or the CIA/FBI would be waking you up in the wee small hours of the morning and giving you a series of long and generous cavity searches followed by beatings, torture and interogation.

Killing is wrong. If you think killing people is going to save humanity then you are severely and dangerously deluded.

The most dangerous weapon anyone can use is their brain. Maybe you should dust it off once in a while.

[Invincible Summer]

If you think that you are gonna organise an armed revolution from your Mum's house with the guys you play World of Warcraft with then may I be the first person to prick your little bubble of self delusion..


Why resort to such low-brow insults?




Killing is wrong. If you think killing people is going to save humanity then you are severely and dangerously deluded.


No one is advocating running around and killing every bourgeois mo'fucka in sight. The thread is "weaponed resistance," not "Who will join me in the massacre of the capitalist class?"



The most dangerous weapon anyone can use is their brain. Maybe you should dust it off once in a while.
Are you a high school counsellor or something? Sounds like what one would say.

[Rangi]

I'm sure that the bourgeoisie will be armed with more than low-brow insults and witty banter. I'm also sure that revolutionaries as hardened as these don't need you to defend them from me destructicon500.

What is wrong with being a high school counselor?

So let me get this straight: It's armed resistance but we aren't going to hurt anybody. Sorry but you'll need to explain that one again to me as it doesn't quite make sense.

[Invincible Summer]

I'm sure that the bourgeoisie will be armed with more than low-brow insults and witty banter. I'm also sure that revolutionaries as hardened as these don't need you to defend them from me destructicon500.

I'm just saying that there's no need to use lame insults, accusing everyone of being WoW nerds.


What is wrong with being a high school counselor?

Well, nothing. It just sounded like typical high-school pep talk a counsellor would give to a couple of kids caught scrapping to convince them that fighting doesn't help anyone.


So let me get this straight: It's armed resistance but we aren't going to hurt anybody. Sorry but you'll need to explain that one again to me as it doesn't quite make sense.

The way I interpret it is that this thread is not calling for a hunt of the bourgeoisie. Rather, it's discussing what would happen once a revolution is beginning/has occurred, and who is willing to help defend against the bourgeoisie/capitalists by force.

Then again, there are many different conversations going on in this thread, so it depends which one you refer to.

Resistance suggests defense, insurgence is offense.

[alhop10]

As i inderstood it, this thread was orginally about the merits of immediate armed resistance, groups like the RAF and the Weathermen etc.

Lets look at this from the other side for a second.

What do you think keeps the ruling classes awake at night? Do you think they fear small, isolated groups attacking police stations and government buildings? Groups that they know they could smash with the smallest flex of their military's muscle? Groups that they can easily turn the masses against with a single media campain? Or the education, radicalisation and motivation of the people against the forces of oppression?

[Invincible Summer]

As i inderstood it, this thread was orginally about the merits of immediate armed resistance, groups like the RAF and the Weathermen etc.

Ah. Well in that case, I suppose that you have a point when you say:


Do you think they fear small, isolated groups attacking police stations and government buildings? Groups that they know they could smash with the smallest flex of their military's muscle? Groups that they can easily turn the masses against with a single media campain?

Although I applaud the efforts of such groups and understand their goal, the bitter truth is that the ruling classes will use their power to turn us into "terrorists" to the people, setting us back in gaining proletarian support.


What do people think of the strategy of joining the military to carry out... "deliberate acts of inefficiency?"

[Rangi]

Sounds like a big waste of time to me. I think the world can be changed through changing minds and not by slowly wasting a countries resources.

[alhop10]

I think the world can be changed through changing minds and not by slowly wasting a countries resources

Yes changing the minds of ordinary people. Convincing them of the undeniable fact that we are many and they (they ruling elite) are few. And that through this simple fact alone they have the ability to take control of the wealth that they have worked so hard to create.

[Marxist]

Well , i ceratinly favor guerilla foco instead of peacefull protest...:che:

[ellipsis]

Although I applaud the efforts of such groups and understand their goal, the bitter truth is that the ruling classes will use their power to turn us into "terrorists" to the people, setting us back in gaining proletarian support.

What do people think of the strategy of joining the military to carry out... "deliberate acts of inefficiency?"

Yah a real good PR person/media team/communique writer would be need in order to even begin to combat the corporate media propaganda machine.

As for joining the military, I have thought about it from time to time, as I would get some of the best training available, on uncle sam's dollar. at the time i could steal supplies, spread propaganda throughout the ranks, etc.

[StalinFanboy]

Jesus fucking Christ. Have you guys never heard of security culture?

[ellipsis]

Jesus fucking Christ. Have you guys never heard of security culture?

I appreciate the concern, but as far as I can tell, nobody on here is even hinting towards anything but hypothetical situations and theoretical concepts. I am a legal gun owner who practices both his 1st and 2rd amendment rights at the same time.

[Marxist]

Hmmm , i wonder where i put the full auto conversions torrent...

[ellipsis]

Hmmm , i wonder where i put the full auto conversions torrent...

lolz, even that information isn't technically illegal in this country, it is simply used for informational/academic purposes. I don't know how it is in your country.

Besides full auto is a great way to waste a bunch of ammo, especially with less-than-ideally trained troops. You can still lay down some heavy fire on semi.

[ellipsis]

hmmm... (I did not bother reading all the posts I just wanna put in my two cents :) ) Living in America I personally don't see a reason to have a armed revolution or anything like that... America is set up in such a way that tho it may take a while and may be very annoying to try an acomplish you can change the government through peaceful means.. besides I am against violence (unless it is very, very necessary and I mean VERY!)
What is vermont succeeded but had to defend itself against foreign/U.S. Contra-style agression? I know I will be ready to help defend the fledgling free state.

[eisidisirock]

I support violence on the people that deserve it. Not on every person that's not a communist.

[Bitter Ashes]

I support violence on the people that deserve it. Not on every person that's not a communist.
And how is guilt determined and what methods are in place to support any appeals in case you're wrong?

[fuckemall]

Armed struggle can be an effective weapon against capitalism, however i dont think that this needs to be directed towards goverment and army.
Instead it ought to be directed toward large companies and finance instituitions, thereby helping bring and speedier end to the monster that is capitalism

[african postman]

the settlement of the issue by war, the seizure of power by arms is the purest and highest form of revolutionnever forget David slew Goliath, the defeat of a superior force is possible if correct tactics are used, history can testify to this

[Marxist]

Go urban guerilla or rural?:huh:

[ellipsis]

Go urban guerilla or rural?:huh:


Where is the majority population of the country located? the means of production? the seats of power? What is the countryside like and would it be suitable for guerrilla warfare?

These are some of the questions you must answer before you make the decision to take to the hills or to the slums.

[Anonymous]

Weaponed resistance to fight with who?
Police and such armed autorities are puppets, men should not be killed just for their ignorance; otherwise we are not better than anyone.
Most revolutions were achieved by appealing to the humane side of the army.

[Mala Tha Testa]

I would definitely support armed resistance.
And I'd more than likely join in the resistance.

[Marxist]

I guess small EU countries would be more suitable for urban guerilla...

[Decommissioner]

Isolated, guerilla-style armed resistance only serves to roll back revolutionary gains, and tarnish whatever genuine mass revolutionary movements exist at the time of such attacks. It is this reason that I believe partaking in violence outside of working class revolutionary movements to be reactionary, as such action plays into the hands of the capitalists. It would also be reactionary if, for example, you were to make such attacks tomorrow while knowing full well that the majority of the working class hasn't come even close to any sort of revolutionary consciousness. It begs the question: What would you do if you actually succeeded in destabilizing the power of the ruling class? Perform a coup and assume power for yourself? Kill off the politicians, create a political power vacuum and leave the working class susceptible to letting a fascist dictator ascend to power in the wake of the confusing terroristic chaos?

And thats just in the unlikely event that individuals are successful in any way. Like someone else has already said, bombing a building or killing an individual(s) will do nothing (in fact, it will hurt any active revolutionary movements) of any concern to the capitalists, while education and working towards mass action is where the real threat lies.

It is only the working class as a whole that can determine when armed struggle is necessary. You may ask when armed struggle is necessary? And I will tell you it is only necessary after the working class has made socialist gains that are under immediate threat from an inevitable reactionary force. Revolution, in theory, doesn't necessitate violence, we communists are just realists and know that the reactionaries will not give up their power without armed struggle. It is this reason that we must remain on the defensive in terms of armed struggle. To put simply the working class will be on the offensive in terms of overthrowing capitalism economically (forming workers councils and such), and will be on the defensive militarily when the reactionaries try to regain their power. This is what necessitates the workers state, controlled by and for workers directly. In a sense, as I understand it (and I may be wrong, for I am quite new to all of this), any sort of armed populace that defends the gains of a socialist (or anarchist, whatever you want to call it) revolution is in itself a state apparatus in the marxist sense of the word 'state', as the working class would be actively oppressing the reactionary minority.

I get the feeling I am rambling a bit, if that is so I apologize. Of course, I am not against people preparing for armed resistance, I support the need for an organized gun culture amongst the revolutionary left. I just believe that by bombing buildings and killing heads of state and the like is jumping the gun (literally), and will do more harm to our image than good. Plus the accumulation of weapons and supplies necessary for a small faction of guerilla soldiers alone will certainly put you on CIA and FBI watch lists. Don't be fooled into thinking that your second and first amendment rights wont be subverted by the ruling class, they will take no chances in allowing anyone the opportunity to challenge their authority.

[african postman]

Go urban guerilla or rural?:huh:


Both Che and Mao stressed the fact that in underdeveloped countries, the battleground for armed struggle should in the main be the countryside.

there is no doubt that conditions of terrain, climate, and countryside society can be used to advantage by guerrilla units against an enemy.

The peasent class is the most revolutionary and as such should form the foundation of the struggle

[african postman]

If history has taught us anything, it is that the Capitalist have always resorted to violence anytime they power has been threatent. And that violence only yeilds to Violence never to peace

Brothers and sisters, if you and I would just realize, that once we learn to talk the language that they understand, they will then get the point.

You can't ever reach a man if you don't speak his language. If a man speaks the language of brute force, you can't come to him with peace. Why goodnight! He'll break you in two, as he has been doing all along. If a man speaks French, you can't speak to him in German. If he speaks Swahili, you can't communicate with him in Chinese. You have to find out, what does this man speak? Once you know his language, learn how to speak his language. He'll get the point, there will be some dialogue, some communication, and some understanding will be developed. You've been around long enough to know the language the Capitalist speaks when they postion is threatent, they only know one language. What you and I have to start doing ,is start learning a new language.
The lanuage of force and violence!

[Rangi]

Survival of the fittest. That sounds like a great idea. Might is right and all that mumbo-jumbo. It sounds a bit like you are more interested in the violence than the liberation to me.

[african postman]

Survival of the fittest. That sounds like a great idea. Might is right and all that mumbo-jumbo. It sounds a bit like you are more interested in the violence than the liberation to me.


And it seems to me that you want to overcome violence with your capacity to love and a bunch of flowers, good luck


I'm tired of people (myself included) believing that liberation will come about without any bloodshed
Make peace with the fact that violence is the necessary and only cure for violence and let’s engage the enemy as brothers

Once again I quote Malcolm X



"Look at the American Revolution, in 1776. That revolution was for what? For land. Why did they want land? Independence. How was it carried out? Bloodshed. Number one, it was based on land, the basis of independence, and the only way they could get it, was bloodshed. The French Revolution, what was it based on — the landless against the landlord. What was it for? Land! How did they get it? Bloodshed! There was no love lost, was no compromise, was no negotiation. I'm telling you you don't know what a revolution is, because when you find out you'll get back in the alley, you'll get out of the way. The Russian Revolution. What was it based on? Land — the landless against the landlord. How did they bring it about? Bloodshed. You haven't got a revolution that doesn't involve bloodshed, and you're afraid to bleed"

[Pawn Power]

In the US, it would be ridiculous now consider armed resistance to the State. The State have been studying war and counter-insurgency for over a hundred years and poor trillions of dollars into weapons, intelligence, and technology. We couldn't possibly compete in any direct way.

What has to happen is for massive numbers of people to be mobilized in support and action for general and prolonged resistance to take place.

[Tom-Guevarist]

These are ridiculus anti-Leninist tactics.

We saw from history that all these groups failed consistently.

From the Narodniks, to the FARC and other terrorist, guerilla groups that spring up like mushrooms.

And when they are successfull in overthrowing capitalism, due to the military structure of the vanguard, with no democracy and strict hierarchy, they fail to create a democratic workers state.

Instead they create a Stalinist monstrosity .

I am very much against these groups as I see that these tactics have failed and have no future.

Only leftists with low theoretical level, fetishize an armed guerilla with an AK-47 on the mountains.

The supporters of these tactics are dissilutioned radicals who have lost faith in the working class and they see it as apathetic . They fail to understand the objective material conditions that make the working class "apathetic" for some period of time.


So they go to the mountains thinking that only them are revolutionary, not only revolutionary but super-revolutionary.

Isolated fromt he masses they fight for a period(10,20 ,40 years) and they accomplish nothing , while honest activists lose their lives for nothing.

Instead they could put all this energy to organize unions in the cities fight for workers rights and when the time is right make a real workers revolution that has prospects to establish workers democracy.

And what about the Cuban revolution ?

[ibn Bruce]

'Oppression is worse than slaughter'

*gets all macho white man up in this*

lock and load:blushing:

[ellipsis]

lock and load

ooh rah

http://lh4.ggpht.com/_0xCx5PWyccM/RvCDJr39cqI/AAAAAAAAAJQ/Zul-qrskMI0/s720/DSC02575.JPG

[Marxist]

:lol:

[swirling_vortex]

I certainly do not support it because as others have said, it would simply make us look bad. Plus, armed revolutions almost always kill innocent people, which we should take deliberate steps to avoid. And even if we managed to secure a couple of locations, how long would it be before the military came in and seized everything?

Unless there's absolutely no other path (and I mean no other path) we should explore more peaceful means of introducing socialism.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Fuck those little terrorist groups, honestly.

Did you all hear that that SLA woman is being released? You know, the one who robbed a bank....and during which repeatedly kicked a pregnant woman in her abdomen, forcing a miscarriage?

I want nothing to do with her nor be associated with her and her mindless associates in any way.


But anyway, what will those groups accomplish? I'll tell ya, the police will start suspecting everyone, wretched gun laws will come into place, police will carry automatic weapons, and what's worst of all, common people will start suspecting everyone...

We are seriously one bombing away from authoritarianism like this country has never seen. And like what's been stated before, if you honestly think your little group can hide out in the woods and defeat the US military you're a delusional teenager.

[manic expression]

And what about the Cuban revolution ?

The guerrilla forces in the Sierra Maestra weren't the only revolutionary forces in Cuba. The July 26 Movement had many members and supporters in the cities as well as in the countryside. And the key for both the urban resistance and the guerrillas was that the July 26 Movement had a broad base of support from both the urban workers and the peasants of Cuba. Lastly, the Cuban revolutionaries had taken up armed struggle because it was the only option available to them after Batista's suppressive measures; that's a far cry from the situation we face today.

And yeah, TheCultofAbeLincoln is right, this reeks of adventurism and worse. Go do some political work in the real world for crying out loud: sell some newspapers, print out a few pamphlets, get in touch with a local socialist group.

[Armand Iskra]

I support armed struggle as the main contributor of the revolution. But then, you need to require more people as well as arms in order to create greater victories against the rotten state.

http://images.hakkon.multiply.com/image/2/photos/25/500x500/13/Katleah.JPG?et=V2wGaBxO51EXsKWLaJ5lIQ&nmid=216894991

[Armand Iskra]

Go do some political work in the real world for crying out loud: sell some newspapers, print out a few pamphlets, get in touch with a local socialist group.

Yes that's what really brings about revolution. Newspapers! Don't you see? Arms are for adventurists [and every force that has carried out a revolution ever].

You are right, but you need arms same as pamphlets, newspapers as well as direct education in order not to become bandits. Remember, you need to Arouse Organize, Mobilize than Agitate, Agitate, Agitate in order to make the revolution successful. We are creating weapon-carrying masses as revolutionaries and not bandits because of being educated and organized; and by the way, there are 2 struggles must be "go together", and that is parliamentary and armed struggle. Parliamentary struggle acts as a shield while Armed struggle acts as a sword in order to make the struggle protracted.