Revolutionary Tactics

[AnarchoCommunistEyepatch]

Are there any modern books on revolutionary tactics in the vein of "Guerilla Warfare" that are more applicable to the modern day?

[Q]

http://www.ak-47.us/AK-47_User_Manuals.php

Seriously though, guerilla warfare is a dead end.

[ellipsis]

Not really... but there is an extensive list of insurgency manuals available for academic study on my blog linked in my signature.

I'll echo Q's comment, adding "at this point."

[Hoplite]

Why is Guevara's work no longer applicable?

[Struggle]

http://www.ak-47.us/AK-47_User_Manuals.php

Seriously though, guerilla warfare is a dead end.

Guerrilla Warfare has been more successful for revolution than selling newspapers and holding up banners.

If you are to dismiss guerrilla warfare, then you must also dismiss what the Communist movement is doing in Britain.

Do you see the contradiction?

Why is Guevara's work no longer applicable?

It is, but you make out that Guevara's work on strategy is the be all and end all for guerrilla warfare. To understand guerrilla warfare, you need to read many books related to it. The book 'Guerrilla Warfare' offers little in terms of fully understanding strategy in the field of irregular warfare. Anybody that reads ‘Guerrilla Warfare’ and then passes judgement on the effectiveness of irregular warfare as a strategy, is speculating and offers little opinion of value or worth.

Every military strategist, even those in support of Capitalism, hold that irregular warfare remains especially effective even today.

But to use ‘Guerrilla Warfare’ by Guevara as a source to cast opinion on how effective irregular warfare actually is, would shame even the most ridiculous of people.

If anything happens too much on the left, it is that of speculation.

[Volcanicity]

http://www.ak-47.us/AK-47_User_Manuals.php

Seriously though, guerilla warfare is a dead end.

Guerilla Warfare may not be so relevant in the west but to completly dismiss it out of hand is wrong and denies the relevancy it still has in the on-going struggles in Asia today. For anyone wanting to read about Guerilla Warfare arguably the most definitive work is by Mao http://marxists.org/reference/archiv...fare/index.htm.

[Widerstand]

I find Lenin's Guerrilla Warfare to be one of the best and most reasonable works I've read on the question of whether or not Guerrilla Warfare is a valid revolutionary tactic (the conclusion is, unsurprisingly, "it depends on the situation").

Other than that, you may also want to take a look at Rosa Luxemburg's Militias And Militarism.

There's also a text by Thälmann about the "Hamburger Aufstand" (where the KPD engaged in streetfights and barricade fights with state forces), but I can't find it anywhere in English.

Other than that, there probably is also lots of discussion on the question of violence by Anarchists (some under the banner of "Propaganda of the Deed", but also independent from it, for example Malatesta thoroughly discussed the question of violence I believe), and of course from people actually involved in Guerrilla Warfare (think of Guevara, the IRA, the PFLP, the BR, the RAF, the RZ, etc.). One group I find particularly interesting, even though I doubt their works are available in English, is "militante gruppe (mg)". Their texts certainly display a profound theoretical background, and they at great lengths discuss armed struggle, militancy and militarism.

As for texts in the style on actual Guerrilla Warfare, I'm pretty clueless. There is a certain banned newspaper (a certain version of the German "Prisma") which deals with militant tactics from what I've read about it (there have been lots of searches and court cases about it's possession in Germany), and there's stuff like the IRA Green Book, but I guess if you want works on Guerrilla Warfare, you'll find them to be either outdated or illegalized.

[Struggle]

I find Lenin's Guerrilla Warfare to be one of the best and most reasonable works I've read on the question of whether or not Guerrilla Warfare is a valid revolutionary tactic (the conclusion is, unsurprisingly, "it depends on the situation").

Sorry, but that’s an absurd statement. Lenin is not a military strategist, and once more, Lenin has little experience in regards to strategic theory. The very reason why Lenin is not acclaimed as a military strategist anywhere is precisely because he cannot by any stretch of the understanding, be a military strategist.

Furthermore, it does not take a genius to claim accurately that using irregular warfare ‘depends on the situation’. Any use of strategy or tactic ‘depends on the situation’. But I sincerely hope there is a more effective strategy in achieving revolution than selling newspapers and going to protests once a month.

When people make such short claims as ’it depends on the situation’ to summarize an entire strategic analysis, one cannot help but make the judgement that they make such short evaluations because they have little insight into the subject they are talking about.

People, please leave politics to the political theorists to write about, and once more, please leave strategic theory to the strategists to write about, because if you don’t, you get people like the above clinging onto those who have been made great because of being involved in a revolution, rather than necessarily being intelligent. Lenin was a great revolutionary, but great not because of his short arguments on military strategy.

Before those who describe themselves as ‘Leninists’ jump on the bandwagon and start critiquing me for disagreeing with their dear Lenin, I uphold the vanguard theory amongst many other ideas coined by Lenin. But by no means do I agree with what he said and uphold it, merely because 'He was Lenin'.

If you honestly believe Lenin’s writing on irregular warfare to be the ‘best and reasonable work’, you should stop reading works written by children and start reading practically every work ever published on and about irregular warfare. You can start with 'Jungle Operations' (FM- 31-35) by the US Military, to name one.

[Widerstand]

Sorry, but that’s an absurd statement. Lenin is not a military strategist, and once more, Lenin has little experience in regards to strategic theory. The very reason why Lenin is not acclaimed as a military strategist anywhere is precisely because he cannot by any stretch of the understanding, be a military strategist.

Furthermore, it does not take a genius to claim accurately that using irregular warfare ‘depends on the situation’. Any use of strategy or tactic ‘depends on the situation’. But I sincerely hope there is a more effective strategy in achieving revolution than selling newspapers and going to protests once a month.

When people make such short claims as ’it depends on the situation’ to summarize an entire strategic analysis, one cannot help but make the judgement that they make such short evaluations because they have little insight into the subject they are talking about.

People, please leave politics to the political theorists to write about, and once more, please leave strategic theory to the strategists to write about, because if you don’t, you get people like the above clinging onto those who have been made great because of being involved in a revolution, rather than necessarily being intelligent. Lenin was a great revolutionary, but great not because of his short arguments on military strategy.

Before those who describe themselves as ‘Leninists’ jump on the bandwagon and start critiquing me for disagreeing with their dear Lenin, I uphold the vanguard theory amongst many other ideas coined by Lenin. But by no means do I agree with what he said and uphold it, merely because 'He was Lenin'.

If you honestly believe Lenin’s writing on irregular warfare to be the ‘best and reasonable work’, you should stop reading works written by children and start reading practically every work ever published on and about irregular warfare. You can start with 'Jungle Operations' (FM- 31-35) by the US Military, to name one.

Judging by your statement, I guess you didn't even read the text before criticizing it. If you did, you somehow managed to grossly miss the point. Lenin's text isn't about how to conduct irregular warfare, it's about whether or not to conduct it. It's not about the military specifics of guerrilla warfare, and indeed he doesn't even talk about those in Guerrilla Warfare. The text is rather about whether or not and under what conditions Guerrilla Warfare is a valid revolutionary tactic that can bring forward the revolutionary cause.

Your polemics against Leninists and Leninism and against selling newspapers are quite baseless too, since we are in agreement here - indeed it would seem fucking absurd to anyone who has read any of my posts on the topic of Leninism or newspapers to think of your post as directed at me.

Now since you happen to know some stuff about US warfare, do you happen to know if they have any books about asymmetric warfare?

[revolution inaction]

http://libcom.org/library/towards-ci...-o-warsaw-pact

but remember there is nothing inherently revolutionary about guerilla warfare, and actual fighting is only a tiny part of revolution and what revolutionaries do.

[Struggle]

Judging by your statement, I guess you didn't even read the text before criticizing it. If you did, you somehow managed to grossly miss the point. Lenin's text isn't about how to conduct irregular warfare, it's about whether or not to conduct it. It's not about the military specifics of guerrilla warfare, and indeed he doesn't even talk about those in Guerrilla Warfare. The text is rather about whether or not and under what conditions Guerrilla Warfare is a valid revolutionary tactic that can bring forward the revolutionary cause.

Your polemics against Leninists and Leninism and against selling newspapers are quite baseless too, since we are in agreement here - indeed it would seem fucking absurd to anyone who has read any of my posts on the topic of Leninism or newspapers to think of your post as directed at me.

Now since you happen to know some stuff about US warfare, do you happen to know if they have any books about asymmetric warfare?

Precisely, and how can anybody who is not an expert in the art of guerrilla warfare, judge accurately whether and when it is effective to use guerrilla warfare in the first place?

I do not believe there is such as a thing as a ‘Leninist’. There are people who describe themselves as ‘Leninists’, but in reality, they are not Leninists, unless of course they agree with everything Lenin ever said, and dismiss anything said in disagreement with him. I have nothing against ‘Leninists ’, I myself, am considered by others a ‘Leninist’. But ultimately, I consider myself a non-doctrine Communist.

Asymmetric warfare is a description of warfare. Whenever there is a guerrilla warfare, it will always certainly be involved in a war which is described as asymmetric warfare.

For example, in Vietnam, China, and today in Colombia, all are/were asymmetric wars. The guerrillas exploit the weaknesses of the government, using time, mobility and space to defeat their enemy. While the governments use/used attrition warfare (wear down) to try and defeat its enemy.

To describe the advantages over the counter-insurgency, I often quote the following by Robert Taber, from ‘War of the Flea’;

“The Guerrilla fights the war of the flea, and his military enemy suffers the dog’s disadvantages: too much to defend, ubiquitous, and agile an enemy to come to grips with”

[Widerstand]

Precisely, and how can anybody who is not an expert in the art of guerrilla warfare, judge accurately whether and when it is effective to use guerrilla warfare in the first place?

By looking at the effects retrospectively and investigating whether or not the stated goal was reached? Seriously I may be giving a very simplified and false version of what the text actually says, but it is a rather well written defense of Guerrilla Warfare against polemics denouncing it, I'm not sure what quarrel you would have with it - have you read it yet?

I do not believe there is such as a thing as a ‘Leninist’. There are people who describe themselves as ‘Leninists’, but in reality, they are not Leninists, unless of course they agree with everything Lenin ever said, and dismiss anything said in disagreement with him. I have nothing against ‘Leninists ’, I myself, am considered by others a ‘Leninist’. But ultimately, I consider myself a non-doctrine Communist.

Anyway, I'm not much concerned with these petty semantics. If you consider yourself a non-doctrinaire Communist, then you're a non-doctrinaire Communist. Personally I would consider myself a "'whatever proves useful'-ist with some moral remarks", but most would root me in somewhere between Anarchism, (libertarian) Communism and maybe Autonomist Marxism I suppose.

Asymmetric warfare is a description of warfare. Whenever there is a guerrilla warfare, it will always certainly be involved in a war which is described as asymmetric warfare.

For example, in Vietnam, China, and today in Colombia, all are/were asymmetric wars. The guerrillas exploit the weaknesses of the government, using time, mobility and space to defeat their enemy. While the governments use/used attrition warfare (wear down) to try and defeat its enemy.

To describe the advantages over the counter-insurgency, I often quote the following by Robert Taber, from ‘War of the Flea’;

“The Guerrilla fights the war of the flea, and his military enemy suffers the dog’s disadvantages: too much to defend, ubiquitous, and agile an enemy to come to grips with”

Well certainly, but I was talking about the specific notion of "asymmetric warfare" as consisting of both military and civil/social/political activity, as exemplified in the Afghan PRTs (which are a horrible disaster in their execution, but I still think the concept is worthy to look at).

Anyway, I will take a look at this "'Jungle Operations' (FM- 31-35)" once I figure out where the fuck to acquire such a work. Is "War Of The Flea" recommendable?

[The Douche]

Learning about guerrilla warfare right now is really only an academic exercise. Real talk, you will probably never participate in a guerrilla campaign, almost certainly not a successful one.

I think there are more important ways to spend your time.

[The Douche]

I would suggest pretty much not reading any military field manual under the impression that it is of any use to engaging in "small war", "guerrilla warfare", or "insurgency".

There is a benefit to reading them to understand how the world's most advanced and combat experienced army acts. But there is little application that the guerrilla can find in these texts.

It's just my opinion, but, I have been in the US army for 5 years, and I have served in special operations capable units.

[Struggle]

Anyway, I will take a look at this "'Jungle Operations' (FM- 31-35)" once I figure out where the fuck to acquire such a work. Is "War Of The Flea" recommendable?

Those I can recommend are:

Art of War - Sun Tzu
On War - Carl von Clausewitz
Strategic Studies: A Reader - Thomas G. Mahnken and Joseph A. Maiolo
Strategy in the Contemporary World - John Baylis, James J Wirtz and Colin S. Gray
On Guerrilla Warfare - Mao Tse Tung
War of the Flea - Robert Taber
Revolution in the Revolution - Regis Debray
Jungle Operations (FM 31-35) - US Military
Professional Knowledge: Gained from operational experience in Vietnam - US Military
The Prince - Niccolo Machiavelli
Guerrilla Warfare - Che Guevara
Mini-Manual of the Urban Guerrilla - Carlos Marighella

All offer great relevance to strategy and irregular warfare.

I would suggest pretty much not reading any military field manual under the impression that it is of any use to engaging in "small war", "guerrilla warfare", or "insurgency".

I strongly disagree. I do not see how you can make such a claim, at least in reference to the books I quoted. To use some examples, Jungle operations states exactly how to conduct and plan attacks, fight most effectively at night, defend against ambushes, and much more. All this is stated at length and directly related to jungle environments, hence the title: Jungle Operations.

Once more, like Sun Tzu stated correctly; ‘If you know yourself and know your enemy, you need not fear the results of a hundred battles’.

[The Douche]

I strongly disagree. I do not see how you can make such a claim, at least in reference to the books I quoted. To use some examples, Jungle operations states exactly how to conduct and plan attacks, fight most effectively at night, defend against ambushes, and much more. All this is stated at length and directly related to jungle environments, hence the title: Jungle Operations.

Notice that your list of suggestions came after my post. And notice that it includes only one military field manual.

The reliance upon technology which is not available to the average insurgent makes it difficult to apply US military tactics to insurgent warfare. Also, the US military functions in a manner which is wholly different from how insurgents must function. Supply lines, airpower, artillery, communications, night vision capabilities, etc these items are vitally important to the tactics which an organization is going to employ in a military situation, and they are very different when you compare insurgents to the US army.

Once more, like Sun Tzu stated correctly; ‘If you know yourself and know your enemy, you need not fear the results of a hundred battles’.

See where I said:

There is a benefit to reading them to understand how the world's most advanced and combat experienced army acts.

?

[Amphictyonis]

Sun Tzu (art of war) is what most 'insurgents' read for philosophical insight, not so much modern technical information . The battle being fought now is for 'peoples hearts and minds'. Capitalists win because they have a consolodated capitalist media to create a reality conducive to their system. This reality won't be ruptured until capitalism hit's a wall and material conditions sharply decline in advanced capitalist nations. Talking about gorilla tactics is fucking absurd at this point. Put that energy into going out n the community and giving a shit about struggling people.

[The Douche]

Capitalists win because they have a consolodated capitalist media to create a reality conducive to their system.

To tag on to this, capitalists "win" because they decide what the terms of "victory" are. There are few/no clean "wins" since WW2, for the major powers that is.

[Amphictyonis]

To tag on to this, capitalists "win" because they decide what the terms of "victory" are. There are few/no clean "wins" since WW2, for the major powers that is.

I'm not so much talking about physical war I'm talking about the global culture war. Capitalism has in fact spread around the globe and in advanced capitalist nations it's dug in like a tic into the public's very conception of reality. It's almost like a massive capitalist global cult that needs deprogramming

It attracts the worlds most famous and powerful. It enjoys support from presidents and world leaders. It's amassed trillions of dollars by exploiting it's members. It seeks to destroy democracy. People will kill for it. Die for it. It's the worlds most powerful cult AND IT'S NOT SCIENTOLOGY. It's Capitalism. LOL

[ellipsis]

Those hosted on my blog:

• The Art of War by Sun Tzu
• Ecodefense: A Field Guide to Monkeywrenching
• Guerilla Warfare: an introduction to the art of revolution
• Guerrilla Warfare by Che Guevara
• Guerrilla Warfare by Mao Tse-Tung USMC FMFRP 12-18
• The Green Book by the IRA
• "Manchester Manual" Alleged Al Queda Handbook
• The Minimanual of the Urban Guerrilla by Carlos Mariaghella
• Psychological Operations in Guerrilla Warfare by the CIA
• Strategy of the Urban Guerrilla by Abraham Guillén
• Towards a Citizen's Militia
• U.S. Army Ranger Handbook SH 21-76
• The Vietnam Primer by David Hackworth and Samuel Marshall

also in the files/download section

Aikido: The Art Of Fighting Without Fighting
Aikido Manual
First Earth Battalion Manual
Frozen in Terror: the FLQ and a Global Struggle against Western Capitalism by The Red Son
The Guerrilla and How To Fight Him USMC FMFRP 12-25
Guerrilla Warfare Tactics in Urban Environments
Knife Throwing Manual
Politicians Love Gun Control by sweat tea
The Revolution Script Reader
Sixth Declaration of the Lacandon Jungle by EZLN
How to Start and Train a Militia Unit PM8-94
Transnational Terrorism by Dr. Charles A Russell
The Vietnam Primer by David Hackworth and Samuel Marshall