KilledInADuel posted:goodbye, daddyholes
hello
daddyholes posted:"Heh. QUoting Lenin? Won't fly on the 'zzone" --KilledInADuel
just a little joke abt saying the t-word on the internet and getting disappeared. you know, with the current events and all? just trying to keep it a little light, heh.
Red_Canadian posted:Yeah, I mean obviously the general population dislikes violence, there's nothing wrong with that, and after a revolution as long as they continuing disliking violence then they are somewhat helpful to the population. I'm just theorizing about the fact that there's a large part of the population that is neither revolutionary, nor reactionary, because they are so passive. Obviously inertia needs to be overcome, but I'm starting to think that is accomplished by failed revolutions. All of the successful large scale movements that changed things seem to have followed many unsuccessful ones, that got violent and were violently repressed. They might even be necessary for the eventual success of a revolution, as even a pyrrhic victory can inspire future revolutions. We need to overcome the liberal agenda, the manufactured dissent idea that non-violence can accomplish major change. How else are you going to do that but with violence?
this is part of it, but honestly i suspect even successful revolutions (with maybe the exception of china, due to the massively extended process they went through before final power seizure) have like, at most 30% support at their beginning
getfiscal posted:rosa luxemberg said that you don't try to build a majority and then have a revolution, you have a revolution to build a majority.
daddyholes posted:this subject is like 50% of Lenin's writings across his life
someone else had some opinions about that too
getfiscal posted:rosa luxemberg said that you don't try to build a majority and then have a revolution, you have a revolution to build a majority.
I see how this worked in a place like china, where the communists were able to build base areas and administer large amounts of the countryside in something resembling peacetime but it clearly failed in germany right.
stegosaurus posted:but it clearly failed in germany right.
i don't actually know much about the german revolution. i was looking at books about it yesterday.
stegosaurus posted:well uh I don't know much about it either but it was defeated. that's all I meant.
i know i just meant i want to understand why it was defeated other than REVISIONISM (which is like ORIGINAL SIN)
swirlsofhistory posted:That's not the SS Minnow, is it?
yes and no. it's the motor yacht granma which was later loaned to the US and used in hollywood tv productions including Gilligans Island
I've read a bit about the German revolution, it failed because the unions cut a deal with the government, demobilized all their workers, and the people left were destroyed by army veterans coming home since the truce was declared. Hell, basically was the reason for it. But then you could argue that was a continuation of the German's Peasants War, and was followed by the Red Army Faction.
HAHA.
Well, clearly that's the main problem with protesting. You attempting to make people give up power, without having any power yourself. A large mass of people yelling and standing in a public place has no physical impact on anyone, and physical impact is what has changed history....through our entire history. Asking the most powerful people to stop treating us so badly isn't likely to work...they profit off treating people badly, and until that stops, they won't.
I've heard talks of black blocs having demonstrations in different areas than the main demonstration, so there's no talk of them disrupting or damaging the message of those that want to act peaceably. Which could have some value, what do you think? most police would probably be at the other demonstration. However, it doesn't let them use the tactical use of Mao's "revolutionaries should be the fish in the sea of the people" to get away from police retribution.
Lastly, I've had a thought which is probably totally crazy. I can obviously see the value in wearing a mask in preventing a single protest from destroying your life, but it makes it too easy for the police and media to get people against you. Do you think there would be any value in doing interviews, acting violently towards property, without a mask, so that people can emphasize with you more, your backstory could humanize you and make your protest more valuable as you risk more?
stegosaurus posted:I see how this worked in a place like china, where the communists were able to build base areas and administer large amounts of the countryside in something resembling peacetime but it clearly failed in germany right.
well the dual declaration of Republics (& popularity of the Social Democrats) along with return of either very freshly radicalized and embittered reactionary soldiers + the chaos of the fall of the Kaiser + very quick action afterwards by the Sparticists & sprinkle in some Rosa-Luxembourg-Thought and maybe a dash of """"adventurism"""" to me explains the crushing of the Spartacus Union revolt.. it was Too Much, Too Rapidly (and, in some respects you could say trying to mimic the Bolsheviks in the period from February to October regardless of Rosa's theoretical differences)
but then the opposite was true for the later KPD / RFB in that, owing to the defeat of too quick an action by their predecessors, they were far too cautionary and did not utilize their organization with enough force at certain key points to force the hand of the SPD/Z
Trot says this trepidation is result of : STALIN STALIN STALIN DOGMA Incorrect Formulation of Popular United Front Blah Blah~~~ but I think that Russian advisers and COMINTERN plans had far less to do with the conditions and thoughts of the German communists than a lot of academics seem to credit them with, + mis-identification and over-reliance of possibility of some sort of "SPD-KPD" front to split SPD workers More Better (WHICH WAS POSSIBLE I SWEAR!!! - trot)
e: sort of mimics the "well are we the CPUSA and DSA who will pick off '''''Democratic Party Workers''''' through entryism or work with the DP or are we The True Ultra Vanguard who, through the correctness of our True Party Line and Great Socialistic Policies will show the Worker the way of Truth out of the Darkness of the Reformists as the Crisis Advances" sort of messy shit that goes on now
Edited by prikryl ()
i get what you're saying though. Building a human, relatable identity certainly seems better than being the unknown, anonymous "other" wreaking havoc. An act carried out with a mask is definitely easily manipulated by the media gate keepers. But then of course, not masking you are definitely risking more.
anonymity/surprise/mystery probably helps your cause militarily, but as for building public awareness/support you'd probably want to be as transparent as possible, including leaving off the mask.
the perfect leader of any movement is in fact a completely fictionalized ideal of a man who is already dead. see: Jesus Christ, JFK, Ronald Reagan
clanzy posted:the whole chris dorner thing was really cool because like half the country openly supported him
for a couple of months it had singlehandedly restored my faith in humanity. i remember going online one day and seeing just dozens and dozens of kids all over twitter and every news article just gushing support for him. an entire generation joyously celebrating copdeath. i almost shed a tear at how beautiful it was
Superabound posted:yes, but the maskless faces of the movement arent supposed to be the ones perpetrating the violence. ideally, the PR front of the movement is going to be people who dont "do" much of anything, other than the PR
ira/sinn fein
daddyholes posted:youll know when its working b/c killing public officials will make you more popular instead of less
^^^^^^^^^^
daddyholes posted:daddyholes posted:youll know when its working b/c killing public officials will make you more popular instead of less
^^^^^^^^^^
not sure if Dorner worked
ಠ,ಠ
or I live in some kind of ideological echo chamber