World Revolution?

**Subversive Pessimist** · 2nd July 2004, 12:58

Sorry if this seem obvious to some people, but I've been thinking about this for a little while.
If a revolution is going to take place. Think realistic:
1. Is it going to be a world revolution where everyone will take part of, at the same time?
2. Is it going to be a revolution that starts step by step (like one country after another)?
3. Are we going to do it like having a small number of communists taking over a country with a dictatorship and a few men in power?

**Roses in the Hospital** · 2nd July 2004, 13:45

1. Is it going to be a world revolution where everyone will take part of, at the same time?
2. Is it going to be a revolution that starts step by step (like one country after another)?

There's probably no deffinative answer to this but I think realistically, the revolution is most likely to happen in stages, one country would inspire another country who would inspire another country and so on...the speed at which this happens being determined by various factors worldwide.
This is certainly what Lenin had in mind. He expected Germany to follow Russia then the rest of Europe to follow Germany into Socialism. Obviously it never worked out though, probably because Europe wasn't ready to perform such a big jump at that time...

3. Are we going to do it like having a small number of communists taking over a country with a dictatorship and a few men in power?

Now you're getting onto controversial ground. Some would argue this 'transition' stage is essential. Others would claim it simply wouldn't work, which historically seems to be the case...

**DaCuBaN** · 2nd July 2004, 18:09

1. Is it going to be a world revolution where everyone will take part of, at the same time?
2. Is it going to be a revolution that starts step by step (like one country after another)?
3. Are we going to do it like having a small number of communists taking over a country with a dictatorship and a few men in power?

You're enjoying asking 'awqward' questions, aren't you?

These three have 'split' the left for so many years now it's sickening, so I will simply give my own interpretation.

"Is it going to be a world revolution where everyone will take part of [or] Is it going to be a revolution that starts step by step"

I believe a succesful revolution would be on a global scale, but the chances of attaining such a feat are slim.

History has shown that the 'revolution in one country' is almost certainly doomed to failure, and so I believe that the prudent course of action is to start a revolt in a small flash point (we've been shown that goegraphically small areas can have profound effects - Northern Ireland, Israel, Cambodia and many more) and continue to spread it as far and wide as possible.

Are we going to do it like having a small number of communists taking over a country with a dictatorship and a few men in power?

Authoritarians would have us doing this, but many 'leftists' would prefer a form of direct democracy in the running of the interim 'state'. As for the revolution itself, the Spanish Anarchists have shown us what happens if you allow the revolution to be 'led' - That is, you get betrayed.

**Pawn Power** · 7th July 2004, 23:46

Originally posted by Justice@Jul 2 2004, 01:58 PM

1. Is it going to be a world revolution where everyone will take part of, at the same time?

yes durring one day their will be a world wide revolution and the next day their will be absolute communism

**__ca va?** · 8th July 2004, 17:26

1. Is it going to be a world revolution where everyone will take part of, at the same time?
2. Is it going to be a revolution that starts step by step (like one country after another)?
3. Are we going to do it like having a small number of communists taking over a country with a dictatorship and a few men in power?

I think we need a 4th solution: a peaceful change to communism. And I think this is the most realistic! Think of Switzerland, where there is almost no poverty, although it is not communist at all. It achieved this by spending money and energy on making the people's life better and more livable, and not on war for example. A world-wide revolution would destroy the whole world's infrastructure and the revolution would collapse immediately after its victory. We don't want this I think.
So the goal is a good life for the people and the instrument is commuism. And communism is not the goal!! The soviets ruined it all when they tried to remain in the framework of commuinsm without thinking of the people.

**cubist** · 9th July 2004, 09:08

i find a necessity for a world revolution i believe it would not eb possible to individuallly change the countries in the west, as War with america would be iminant if revolution happened in the UK it would be a horrible threat to them,

but i imagine it will happen country by country when one does it the rest will follow soon after

**h&s** · 9th July 2004, 11:42

1. Is it going to be a world revolution where everyone will take part of, at the same time?
2. Is it going to be a revolution that starts step by step (like one country after another)?

Surely the worldwide revolution would be a step-by-step, country-by-country thing. We can't honestly expect it to all happen at the same time.
Maybe a step-by-step one would eventually gather so much momentum it would develop into a full-blown worldwide rebellion, but I doubt it. We have had two chances now, Lenin's idea as has previously posted, and the time after the Cuban revolution where Guevara believed he could cause a Tricontinental revolution.
I think that if any of us ever have the good fortune to take part in their revolution, it will be an isolated thing, and just a very small step towards world communism.

**VukBZ2005** · 9th July 2004, 12:26

i Feel that Worldwide Proletarian Revolution would happen gradually - but it would be
like a Domino Effect first one Country say france than another one and another one, and
etc.

**The Sloth** · 21st July 2004, 13:04

Country by country, of course.

But the international "anti-bourgeois" mentality should already be there to prepare the way.

Karo de Perro · 21st July 2004, 15:43

At the risk of appearing to be a Trotskyite,something Im not,I must point out that for a true socialist revolution to be effective in one country then it can only take place by an emphasis and active planning on permanent universal revolution,as well as active participation in the same.

The First International was organized as means to unite the upper-layer working class on a universal scale and this initial effort was attended by trade unionists,proto-communists,anarchists,radicals,etc from various nations and was instrumental for Marx to lay out the foundations of the Labor movement in Europe,Britain and America.

It soon dissolved and Lenin,Trotsky and their comrades emerged as champions of the Second International as organizers of the means to liberate workers from their enslavement to imperialism.

Sadly Boshevism carried the seeds of Stalinism and its bureaucratic isolationism which amounted to nothing more than transference of society from one slave-master to another,for with Stalin Boshevism degenerated into a repressive tyranny masquerading as a proletariat dictatorship.

This then has been the case with all so-called socialist states or what western historical writers term as communist countries,they have been nothing more than petty bourgeois empires forged under the pretence of a peoples republic and fueled by state capitalism which the elite cadre of the party manipulated for their own prestige while oppressing and murdering their own people.

If we cannot somehow acheive an ideal socialist society aside from those examples laid out before us as with the former USSR,Peoples Republic of China,etc then comrades we should abandon all thoughts of socialism altogether this very moment.

However,by the foregoing I do not wish to remotely imply that Karo is an Anarchist for truly I am a firm defender of statism,only that the state which I envision is not one given over to a singular tyrant and his henchmen but rather a state of,for and by a nations collective people.

This ideal state must be forged on delegations,discussion and debate,it must by all means conceiveable take into consideration the welfare and collective opinions of every citizen in its care.

In every town and province there must be peoples committees founded for the purpose of recording and transferring their will to the state and from these commitees delegations are to be formed which in turn will appoint representatives to meet with and form other delegations throughout the state beginning first at community levels with the basic committee then climbing upward through ascending levels such as county,district and regional delegations.

This then must be the initial structure,not only of a socialist state,but of socialism on a universal scale ... and socialism MUST be on a universal scale,otherwise it is destined for failure.

**ComradeRed** · 21st July 2004, 18:48

I predict it would be like a domino effect, but it would start in one nation. I mean, there would be nation a who becomes communist, the bordering nations b and c become communist too, then c, d, e, and f become communist, so on and so forth. So it will "start" in one nation, but it will happen all at once (i.e. within a decade).

Karo de Perro · 21st July 2004, 19:30

Within a single acorn are a thousand forests,the longest journey begins with a single step,the greatest fire begins with a single spark ... and so it is with universal socialism - it ultimately has small beginnings but with sufficient fuel it shall engulf the entire world.

**CubanFox** · 22nd July 2004, 04:41

I would say region by region. Portuguese Africa exploded into Marxist revolution in the 1970's, southeast Asia in the '50s.

One revolution in 1848 made all of Europe rise up against their masters!

Curiously enough, the imperialists were right! The domino effect is real!

**Lefty** · 31st July 2004, 06:22

Region by region, probably. However, for it to get anywhere, there would need to be worldwide support for the ongoing revolutions.

wet blanket · 31st July 2004, 15:42

The proletariat revolution must be permanent and international, HERE'S WHY (You don't have to be a trotskyite to see that his theory holds a lot of truth). Socialism within a single nation, 'Stalinism', does not work or results in a totalitarian state... either way, it's not good.

Though, it will take a rather large event to trigger such a revolution, there must also be an effort to ensure it spreads. I get the feeling that it would not be as cut and dry as a country-by-country conversion to socialism though... I suspect that parts of countries will be considered "commie zones"(for lack of a better term) and private industry will move work from those places as a result of general strikes, violent protest, and whatnot. I'd say 'region-by-region' would be a good way to put it...

Though once the revolution is clearly under way, with factories seized and private industry on the outs, I get the feeling that there will be a struggle between stateless socialists, statists, and those who'd like to bring back capitalism. It'll be hairy times.

Thread: World Revolution?

Thread Tools

Similar Threads

Revolution in the 1st World

Revolution in the Third World

First World Revolution

Revolution and the Third World

World Revolution?

Posting Permissions

Tags for this Thread