Should Communists Support this kind of thing?

[thinkerOFthoughts]

http://www.vermontrepublic.org/ Secessionist movements! should we support them? The main Idea's of Secession is the dissolving the Union (America) I think if these things where successful it would really help at establishing a Communist society especially since we wont be dealing with such a huge corporate giant! Aslo on that link above (by the way Vermont has the largest Secessionist movement in America!! go figure lol I love my state) go click on the "About SVR" thing... it dosn't seem to bad to try and support them.

[zimmerwald1915]

http://www.vermontrepublic.org/ Secessionist movements! should we support them? The main Idea's of Secession is the dissolving the Union (America) I think if these things where successful it would really help at establishing a Communist society especially since we wont be dealing with such a huge corporate giant! Aslo on that link above (by the way Vermont has the largest Secessionist movement in America!! go figure lol I love my state) go click on the "About SVR" thing... it dosn't seem to bad to try and support them.
You're kidding, right? There's no particular reason that the new states would be any less capitalist than the old. In fact, the exact opposite, if history is any guide, is usually the case. Furthermore, the working class in the new state (and the old, in which reaction ensues) is usually inundated with nationalism after secession and is therefore less willing to struggle alongside the foreigners across the border. Not to mention the fact that communists are in favor of centralization rather than the splitting up of the world into little statelets.

Secessionism always helps the bourgeoisie.

[Bilan]

Some will say yes, others will say no.
I am with the latter - seceding doesn't give the working class the upper hand against the capitalist class, in reality, it only substitutes the old bourgeois with a new one: socioeconomic structures remain in tact; it remains subservient to the whims of the global economy and to the irrationality of the market. Nothing changes but a heightened sense of nationalism, which is in no way beneficial to the working class.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

But wouldn't it be more benenficial to try and deal with a country so much smaller and less powerful than the United States? they wont have such a huge army! not all of them will go to Capitalism I dont think. Plus I think it would be beneficial to have a strong Communist presence in such organisations that way if secession works! we can try to get our form of society in! or at least make a push into a socialist government.

[Bilan]

A socialist government, implementing "socialist" policies from above does not pave the way for the emancipation of the working class. History demonstrates that ever so eloquently, that repeating it is, well...
Hegel once remarked that history repeats itself, he forgot to mention first time as tragedy, second time as farce. - Marx
Speaks for itself on that one.

Workers liberation comes from the self-activity and self-emancipation of the working class - that can't be stressed enough.


Furthermore, the army of this particular nation will be smaller, but the revolution can't and wont ever be limited to one small state, nor one big one - it is international or it whithers, just like the past ones. So it becomes entirely irrelevant.
Also, many people within the army often joined the revolution - it happened in places like Russia. Alot of soldiers are infact from working class backgrounds, and although at the present their support lies with the enemy, history has also demonstrated that in times of upheaval, their class alliances sometimes rise to the top (for some).
For example, the strikes in Germany following WWI; the mutinies in the army, the navy - this occurred everywhere.

What counts now is realizing that a new bourgeois state, of whatever size, is not beneficial - total self-emancipation is the direction to be taken, and it comes from internationalist revolution. It starts, and spreads.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

hmmm this makes me wonder how Communism can even be acomplished lol! it would def require probably one of the worlds largest mass revolts ever known to man kind! and on a global scale!! man thats big... and seems very hard to try to attain.

[Bilan]

It's not going to all happen at once.
Its more likely to happen much like it did in 1917 - it started in Russia, and began to spread rapidly. Australia, Germany, Spain, etc.
The point was that then it failed. This time, it wont.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

Well hopefully it will work this time... unless after the revolt all the different kinds of Communism start fighting for how things should be done. Makes me wonder.... how will it be done? in America I mean... it just seems so massive.. and the fact that it is our worlds sole super power... how are a bunch of armed civilians suppose to face up against the worlds most professionally trained military?

[zimmerwald1915]

Well hopefully it will work this time... unless after the revolt all the different kinds of Communism start fighting for how things should be done. Makes me wonder.... how will it be done? in America I mean... it just seems so massive.. and the fact that it is our worlds sole super power... how are a bunch of armed civilians suppose to face up against the worlds most professionally trained military?
They're not. If we're doing our job right, we'll have at least part of the military on our side:D

[thinkerOFthoughts]

They're not. If we're doing our job right, we'll have at least part of the military on our side:D

They're not what?

[gorillafuck]

He said they're not expected to take on the whole military.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

oh. Will it possible to have a country wide revolt? or would have to be more of a sectional thing? like the north east revolts, and seizes control then maybe a week later the same thing happens in some other section untill it all taken?

[Bilan]

You can't really predict that, no one really knows how it will start.

[Sprocket Hole]

Thinker of thoughts, armed revolution is not the only way. All's it could simply take is one comunity to take over the desision making and the workers take over the means of production. This could eventually spark the same to go down in the rest of the country, and soon the world.
It would take time, but armed revolution is not always the best way, as history has shown.

Don't make such closed statements, who said the US Army is the most professionally trained in the world? ;)

[Bilan]

Thinker of thoughts, armed revolution is not the only way. All's it could simply take is one comunity to take over the desision making and the workers take over the means of production. This could eventually spark the same to go down in the rest of the country, and soon the world.
It would take time, but armed revolution is not always the best way, as history has shown.

You can't just take over and expect no repercussions for such an action.
Needless to say, we don't support a coup d'etat or what have you.
But the proletarian uprising wont be peaceful because it can't be - you can't rise against the upper class and expect them to just bare it, no questions asked.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

Don't make such closed statements, who said the US Army is the most professionally trained in the world? ;)

Come on man:rolleyes: its very clear they are. Although they represent a system that sucks they are still pretty much the most professional.

[The Feral Underclass]

Apparently the Dutch army are the best trained in the world.

A revolutionary situation will occur after years of struggle created when the material conditions for working class people are at such a point where the ideological control of the ruling class no longer can be justified. Workers will make demands, they will be ignored, a movement will emerge, the state will attempt to repress it and at one particular moment that tension will result in the working class becoming organised to such a level that they no longer make demands for change, they become change and seize control of their communities and workplaces.

This is an historical experience and has occurred many times before.

[Labor Shall Rule]

'Succession' (at least in underdeveloped regions) create independent centers of accumulation. It's worth 'supporting' in that respect.

In Vermont? Eh, that's a bit weird.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

'Succession' (at least in underdeveloped regions) create independent centers of accumulation. It's worth 'supporting' in that respect.

In Vermont? Eh, that's a bit weird.

lol whats so strange about Vermont Seceding?

[Bilan]

'Succession' (at least in underdeveloped regions) create independent centers of accumulation. It's worth 'supporting' in that respect.

In Vermont? Eh, that's a bit weird.

I can't see anyway it can be beneficial, in any sense. It divides the working class on more superficial boundaries, it substitutes the old bourgeoisie with a new one, it in no way brings forward the emancipation of the working class in any sense whatsoever: how can that be beneficial?

[Labor Shall Rule]

I can't see anyway it can be beneficial, in any sense. It divides the working class on more superficial boundaries, it substitutes the old bourgeoisie with a new one, it in no way brings forward the emancipation of the working class in any sense whatsoever: how can that be beneficial?

If there is national economic control then there is the allocation of revenue within those 'boundaries' to productive investments, along with funding for defence, social care, and infastructure. It is, as I said, the creation of new centers of accumulation, which is very 'progressive' in that sense.

[chegitz guevara]

Should we support breaking up the most powerful imperialist state in world history?


Sometimes I think it just depends on how you phrase the question.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

Should we support breaking up the most powerful imperialist state in world history?


Sometimes I think it just depends on how you phrase the question.

lol see? why do you make secession sound so much better? lol.

[Reclaimed Dasein]

It's not going to all happen at once.
Its more likely to happen much like it did in 1917 - it started in Russia, and began to spread rapidly. Australia, Germany, Spain, etc.
The point was that then it failed. This time, it wont.
Even if it does fail, we must fail, and fail better.

As for supporting secessionist movements, I hate to sound like a dogmatic Marxist, but we should look at the material conditions. Some secessionist movements seem worth supporting because they're fighting for a better world like the Kurds and the ETA(for all their problems). However, this party seems associated with the Alaskan independence party which makes me think they're probably right wing nut jobs.

[which doctor]

lol whats so strange about Vermont Seceding?
Because despite many attempts, no state or region has ever successfully seceded. It's just not a likely possiblity, the United States gov't is not going to let some tiny state like Vermont just secede. Besides, secession isn't even all that much supported in Vermont.

Besides, secession would just create another capitalist state, it does nothing for the emancipation of the working class.

[thinkerOFthoughts]

Because despite many attempts, no state or region has ever successfully seceded. It's just not a likely possiblity, the United States gov't is not going to let some tiny state like Vermont just secede. Besides, secession isn't even all that much supported in Vermont.

Besides, secession would just create another capitalist state, it does nothing for the emancipation of the working class.

Actually the Vermont Secessionist movement is the united states largest and most supported secessionist movement around.

Tho I think I agree with you guys on how it wont help the working class. Although this movement wants a more centralized government and minimal trading with others... self supporting community I suppose:confused:

[wasteman]

I would say no to this