Once you take power, you literally have to kill everyone who would commit acts of horrible violence against the revolution and the proletariat.
there is so much wrong with this holy fuck. imagine not drawing a single fiber of a lesson from all the horrible communist mass killings of the last century. literally the single biggest mistake of the marxist mainstream is building a violence-careless praxis from very dubious readings of the french and haitian revolutions. without it we'd still have somalia and ethiopia. pol pot wouldn't have happened. in contrast, the biggest lession of the late communist revolutionary wave was that you have to imbue the revolution with humanism. thats how we got a cuba which restrained itself and maintained a cohesive social fabric. what a profoundly reckless ideological wreckage you perpetuate here
Like fuck, successful communist movements have (largely) limited themselves to defensive violence, and instances where they stepped outside of that are generally (correctly) considered mistakes.
And how do you know exactly who would, for sure? You can see the future?
Putting aside how it's bad to kill people who haven't done anything wrong yet, consider the practical implications: it opens you to counter-intelligence operations to get you to execute loyal party members, for instance.
Facebook posturing is enough to keep an eye on them. I wouldn't round them up and kill them outright - that's a lot of people who haven't committed a crime other than having their peanut brains rotted by American propaganda.
The ones that immediately joining organized militias, yeah have at it.
Nah, sorry if it came off that way. It's just that in the last few days I've had several arguments on here with people who were (edit: or seemed to be) calling for some pretty excessive violence. Hope you have a good day.
I’m only being somewhat reductive. Forced re-education like Cuba did in some cases should be a part of it. Even so, Fidel and the Cuban revolutionaries executed a bunch of the wealthiest slaveowners. It’s a pity some of the Gusanos escaped.
At what point did I say there shouldn’t be social programs and humanism? Ask Allende how far obsessing over reconciliation and class collaboration worked out.
Imagine thinking that the Chinese people executing the feudal landlords was “unrestrained”. They should learn better from western white people next time.
Letting someone live who will murder you and everyone you care about to preserve a system that depends on human misery is weakness and liberalism.
what a profoundly reckless ideological wreckage you perpetuate here
The examples you give are either defensive (killing the landlords, who were killing peasants) or justice (executing slaveowners who had killed many after the revolution). They didn't kill all the Gusanos, just the ones that had committed heinous violence and were sentenced to death.
That’s exactly what I’m talking about. You kill the ones who have committed heinous violence or will commit heinous violence to regain control.
Does anyone think we should hypothetically leave Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk alive after a successful revolution? No, they would do everything they could to seize power and topple a communist movement.
Once you take power, you literally have to kill everyone who would commit acts of horrible violence against the revolution and the proletariat.
You can't just kill everyone you think might be a threat in the future, Ms. Pol Pot.
No, they would do everything they could to seize power and topple a communist movement.
So? Take all their shit, and if they respond with violence, then kill them in defense. Alternately, try them for their crimes and execute them if it's warranted. This is usually how things go. You don't kill people before they commit the crime because you're pretty sure they will after.
Apologies, my mistake - I'll edit the post. My point is you need evidence of wrongdoing. You can't kill people you think will do wrong in the future.
I have no problem with killing enemies of the revolution given the right situation, but they actually have to be guilty in a way that warrants execution.
At what point did I say there shouldn’t be social programs and humanism? Ask Allende how far obsessing over reconciliation and class collaboration worked out.
you dont understand these terms, i take it.
Imagine thinking that the Chinese people executing the feudal landlords was “unrestrained”. They should learn better from western white people next time.
you couldnt help yourself from a classic race card strawman double decker.
Letting someone live who will murder you and everyone you care about to preserve a system that depends on human misery is weakness and liberalism.
first you know that they in the future are going to commit horrible acts of violence, now you know they are going to murder ..
like, imagine going on defensive like this after outright stating that one should kill everybody who you assume will retaliate with violence. my person. one thing is proceeding with a tribunal verdict. one thing is employing violence in response to conditions as they occur. what you're thinking is very far in some deep dark place
During the Cuban revolution and shortly afterwards they killed or exiled like 98% of people that had positions of the Batista state or supported it or benifited from it and didnt defect, from the local to the highest level. I dont know how is that a counter example or how you reply to "we should purge reactionaries that would take action to harm us during and after the revolution" with "well thats how we got pol pot". Well yeah among a dozen other reasons i guess. But thats also how we got any project that survived more than a couple of years and was able to become stable anough and overcome the opposing forces domesticaly and worldwide to a big enough degree that it could afford the humanist apporach and turned away from any mass repression, like with Cuba
i guess i have to conclude that you haven't really understood this beyond internalizing some quick catechisms. this is a cuban perspective on revolutionary violence:
Once you take power, you literally have to kill everyone who would commit acts of horrible violence against the revolution and the proletariat.
When our time comes, we will not make excuses for the terror.
there is so much wrong with this holy fuck. imagine not drawing a single fiber of a lesson from all the horrible communist mass killings of the last century. literally the single biggest mistake of the marxist mainstream is building a violence-careless praxis from very dubious readings of the french and haitian revolutions. without it we'd still have somalia and ethiopia. pol pot wouldn't have happened. in contrast, the biggest lession of the late communist revolutionary wave was that you have to imbue the revolution with humanism. thats how we got a cuba which restrained itself and maintained a cohesive social fabric. what a profoundly reckless ideological wreckage you perpetuate here
Gonzaloids continue to have a normal one.
Like fuck, successful communist movements have (largely) limited themselves to defensive violence, and instances where they stepped outside of that are generally (correctly) considered mistakes.
How is what I’m saying anything other than that?
Emphasis on “would”. You can rephrase it as “will” if that makes you feel better.
Gonzalo was an idiot who thought that murdering the proletariat would build class consciousness.
And how do you know exactly who would, for sure? You can see the future?
Putting aside how it's bad to kill people who haven't done anything wrong yet, consider the practical implications: it opens you to counter-intelligence operations to get you to execute loyal party members, for instance.
Good start: The chuds posting pictures on facebook of their guns and about how much they want to shoot communists.
Facebook posturing is enough to keep an eye on them. I wouldn't round them up and kill them outright - that's a lot of people who haven't committed a crime other than having their peanut brains rotted by American propaganda.
The ones that immediately joining organized militias, yeah have at it.
I’ll remember to add conditional statements to a throwaway shitpost comment next time.
Reason I’m being a dick about this is because as a woman I’m used to having hairs split over words I pick. Probably not your intent.
Anyways communism will win, kill and eat the rich, etc etc. Thanks for the banter.
Nah, sorry if it came off that way. It's just that in the last few days I've had several arguments on here with people who were (edit: or seemed to be) calling for some pretty excessive violence. Hope you have a good day.
I’m only being somewhat reductive. Forced re-education like Cuba did in some cases should be a part of it. Even so, Fidel and the Cuban revolutionaries executed a bunch of the wealthiest slaveowners. It’s a pity some of the Gusanos escaped.
At what point did I say there shouldn’t be social programs and humanism? Ask Allende how far obsessing over reconciliation and class collaboration worked out.
Imagine thinking that the Chinese people executing the feudal landlords was “unrestrained”. They should learn better from western white people next time.
Letting someone live who will murder you and everyone you care about to preserve a system that depends on human misery is weakness and liberalism.
muh civility
The examples you give are either defensive (killing the landlords, who were killing peasants) or justice (executing slaveowners who had killed many after the revolution). They didn't kill all the Gusanos, just the ones that had committed heinous violence and were sentenced to death.
That’s exactly what I’m talking about. You kill the ones who have committed heinous violence or will commit heinous violence to regain control.
Does anyone think we should hypothetically leave Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk alive after a successful revolution? No, they would do everything they could to seize power and topple a communist movement.
You can't just kill everyone you think might be a threat in the future, Ms. Pol Pot.
So? Take all their shit, and if they respond with violence, then kill them in defense. Alternately, try them for their crimes and execute them if it's warranted. This is usually how things go. You don't kill people before they commit the crime because you're pretty sure they will after.
Don’t misgender me.
So yeah, kill them. Go through whatever steps make you feel better.
Apologies, my mistake - I'll edit the post. My point is you need evidence of wrongdoing. You can't kill people you think will do wrong in the future.
I have no problem with killing enemies of the revolution given the right situation, but they actually have to be guilty in a way that warrants execution.
Thanks. Best insult during a stupid online argument I’ve gotten so far.
:wholesome:
Thank u, I try. :stalin-approval:
you dont understand these terms, i take it.
you couldnt help yourself from a classic race card strawman double decker.
first you know that they in the future are going to commit horrible acts of violence, now you know they are going to murder ..
like, imagine going on defensive like this after outright stating that one should kill everybody who you assume will retaliate with violence. my person. one thing is proceeding with a tribunal verdict. one thing is employing violence in response to conditions as they occur. what you're thinking is very far in some deep dark place
Okay bruh good talk lol
You’re now literally arguing against a sentence I never wrote lmao
im highlighting an important thought, not quoting you directly.
During the Cuban revolution and shortly afterwards they killed or exiled like 98% of people that had positions of the Batista state or supported it or benifited from it and didnt defect, from the local to the highest level. I dont know how is that a counter example or how you reply to "we should purge reactionaries that would take action to harm us during and after the revolution" with "well thats how we got pol pot". Well yeah among a dozen other reasons i guess. But thats also how we got any project that survived more than a couple of years and was able to become stable anough and overcome the opposing forces domesticaly and worldwide to a big enough degree that it could afford the humanist apporach and turned away from any mass repression, like with Cuba
capitalist propaganda. cuba took most of those people off death row
… They liberated the people Batista had imprisoned on death row, yes.
What parts of during and shortly after the revolution and for those that didnt turn you didnt get.
LeftComs and desperately needing to believe you can lead the revolution from an armchair, name a more iconic duo.
i guess i have to conclude that you haven't really understood this beyond internalizing some quick catechisms. this is a cuban perspective on revolutionary violence:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2633612?seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents
:jesus-christ:
This is how you get tonnes of paranoia.
:think-mark: You aren't paranoid if they really are out to get you.:think-about-it:
deleted by creator