I sincerely disagree. 15,000 members of the US Armed Forces do not move the needle on the US' imperial might (which ultimately is predicated on financial domination and vassals, not military prowess). 15,000 marginalized people within the armed forces, however, represented a prime tactical advantage for a revolutionary political movement. See: Aaron Bushnell.
Obviously we can talk back and forth all day long about how the US armed forces can never be truly radicalized because of their position as footsoldiers of capital, but the hard material reality is that the American left is deficient in firepower but the military is full of possible fellow travelers. Remember that the Chinese Red Army was mostly made up of Nationalist deserters. How do you expect to be successful without a significant fifth column?
Those 15,000 aren't just combat roles and grindable meat; a lot of them are in support and technical roles. There are a lot of roles in which removing 1 person creates a sizable inconvenience for many and can harm operations. You are correct that trans people are overrepresented as saboteurs in the military, but almost all of those people joined pre-transition and seeing the contradictions of US empire radicalized them. The trans people who have transitioned and then joined are more often than not dyed-in-the-wool believers in the US empire who don't have the same opportunity for radicalization.
Which is exactly why I think it's a bad thing that this is happening now. If this happened because they represented a threat in the order of the US military then it'd be a good thing, they'd join the communists. But the fact that it's just happening as a random action to pander to chuds is, in my estimation, an unforced W for American empire and the rare accidental strategic good move, denying the enemy (us!) a valuable advantage in the future.
If they're technical support personnel they'd be even more valuable fifth columnists.
I'll admit that what others in the thread said is true, trans troops are troops first and marginalized second, but if we categorically dismiss the tactical utility of potential collaborators we can't succeed.
I'm fine with a tiny 15,000 of those "possible fellow travellers" getting a good dose of reality to leave the Wehrmacht- and ideally in the process, the contradictions and lies or the empire also being pushed forward a bit moreso into the minds of any such others with the same potential (human decency/empathy).
Also, IMO- it does not do our community (the trans community) globally or even within the US/west any favors IMO, to have token Uncle Toms joining in the empire's war machine, whatever their motivations. Just like Isntreal flying the trans or rainbow flags is no benefit- or like how Obama's election did no favors to the black and African communities within the US or outside it (as an Asian seeing what he did to Africa's most developed country and black wealth/homeownership in the US I have said I hope I don't see some Asian POTUS), etc.
Yeah, 7deadlyfetishes, but I'm taking a very different position here. He more or less came at it from a position of tailism, that the left ought to try to appeal to troops to bring them in. I think something very different, the left still ought to be the vanguard in front, I'm just saying that dismissing the utility of the troops that might be politically aligned with our cause is a mistake. We shouldn't sacrifice even 1 bit of our correctness for the sake of appealing to fascists, troops, cops, etc etc. But you really mean to tell me with a straight face that the correct move, tactically or strategically, is to turn away any would-be collaborators within the institutions we oppose? When they might want to do exactly the same thing we want to do?
I agree with you. Besides, I think disenchantment can be a powerful motivator for somebody to go through a change in values, and start to act in reparation of their victims. It happened in South Africa, it's happening in Colombia, and it is a very important part of moving past damaging conflict.
True, but it's not like they're organized. If this was happening 10 years from now with an actual organized left that could quickly take the opportunity I'd more readily agree with you. Taking the opportunity away from us to turn these people into allies preemptively is surely a negative.
It does beg the question of where they'll go from here.
Remember that the Chinese Red Army was mostly made up of Nationalist deserters.
Well yes, but as socialists we should be strategically in support of universal conscription. A volunteer army is not likely to produce these results...
Especially a volunteer army that is essentially a bunch of mercenaries serving to get college or $50,000 or whatever. A lot of them aren’t even signing up because of some misguided patriotism or whatever at this point.
US military is already admittedly understaffed. It's a particular problem in the Navy and Air Force. They haven't been meeting recruiting targets well at all and the article I read said they missed last year's target by 45,000. If these people are all just gun-toting boots then yeah it doesn't impact how things work. But if some amount of them are specialists it could cause severe strain and negligence in various parts like their ships not being repaired properly, their aircraft having problems, just all kinds of things that impact the machinery of the war machine itself that keep the more technical aspects above a bunch of people who handle M-16s and hang out in Japan or Germany.
I do not think the conditions yet exist for these people to be truly revolutionary. Remember they signed up for this. They weren't conscripts and comparing this to China's situation in their civil war is like comparing apples to horse-shoes. Those people in China's nationalist army were revolutionaries of a kind who wanted independence and self-determination for their country, many of them were misled into a certain kind of nationalism but upon discovering communism they were amenable to it given it fit their passions and goals and met them much more effectively because communism was a message of hope to these people given their history, that of their parents, etc. It allowed them to save and liberate their people, promised to rejuvenate their nation and has succeeded. What passions and goals does resisting the US government meet for people who joined up because they're willing to enable killing brown people for healthcare or college and other highly individually centered selfish goals? What's the similarity there?
They'll be upset yes and that's good. I'm glad there is tension there as should we all be glad that the empire isn't able to effectively do rainbow imperialism with people like Trump taking off the mask so much. But I don't think so upset they'll be revolutionary. Americans are incredibly atomized and 15,000 is frankly a drop in the bucket. Could some of them eventually become part of something? Sure but they don't represent any kind of collective force that's going to pop up in any meaningful numbers to defend the marginalized when Hitler-lite (D) takes office and tunes the repression machine higher. I mean right now we're in the middle of a genocide and the response is to crush college protests, to criminalize dissent against the zionist entity and classify it as racism and the response to that is liberals smugly blaming the left and saying we deserve it and collective feelings of despair and powerlessness.
Things are going to get much worse in the US before that revolutionary potential arrives and I don't think it will be these people frankly. I think they'll be in their 40s at least before that moment arrives and it will be some new group of people in or recently in the military when things hit the fan that will turn their guns around. I think between that moment arriving and now we will have a war with China and the way things are going maybe with Russia more directly too.
You have a very important point, war with China is much more proximal than revolutionary war. That changes the calculus. I think I stand by my belief that a fifth column is a required part of a successful leftist revolution against a militarized imperialist state; however it might be of greater utility for progressive forces outside the US for a large number of military specialists to be laid off without replacement. We'll see.
Good because this will probably weaken the military along with his purges. If it makes the military less competent, I'm for it.
I sincerely disagree. 15,000 members of the US Armed Forces do not move the needle on the US' imperial might (which ultimately is predicated on financial domination and vassals, not military prowess). 15,000 marginalized people within the armed forces, however, represented a prime tactical advantage for a revolutionary political movement. See: Aaron Bushnell.
Obviously we can talk back and forth all day long about how the US armed forces can never be truly radicalized because of their position as footsoldiers of capital, but the hard material reality is that the American left is deficient in firepower but the military is full of possible fellow travelers. Remember that the Chinese Red Army was mostly made up of Nationalist deserters. How do you expect to be successful without a significant fifth column?
Those 15,000 aren't just combat roles and grindable meat; a lot of them are in support and technical roles. There are a lot of roles in which removing 1 person creates a sizable inconvenience for many and can harm operations. You are correct that trans people are overrepresented as saboteurs in the military, but almost all of those people joined pre-transition and seeing the contradictions of US empire radicalized them. The trans people who have transitioned and then joined are more often than not dyed-in-the-wool believers in the US empire who don't have the same opportunity for radicalization.
Not only depriving the military of those skillsets and capacities, but absorbing them for ourselves
There is no outlet to absorb these people though. They just go back to capitalism rather than joining the bolsheviks
Not en masse no, and I think developing the capacity to do so is gonna be an increasingly good bet as things get more tense, fractious and doomy
Which is exactly why I think it's a bad thing that this is happening now. If this happened because they represented a threat in the order of the US military then it'd be a good thing, they'd join the communists. But the fact that it's just happening as a random action to pander to chuds is, in my estimation, an unforced W for American empire and the rare accidental strategic good move, denying the enemy (us!) a valuable advantage in the future.
lets not do clean wehrmacht but in the USAF now.
Somehow I don't think those 15,000 trans people in the USAF are majorily frontline infantry
If they're technical support personnel they'd be even more valuable fifth columnists.
I'll admit that what others in the thread said is true, trans troops are troops first and marginalized second, but if we categorically dismiss the tactical utility of potential collaborators we can't succeed.
On reflection I see my point was confusing, that's what I was getting at
I'm fine with a tiny 15,000 of those "possible fellow travellers" getting a good dose of reality to leave the Wehrmacht- and ideally in the process, the contradictions and lies or the empire also being pushed forward a bit moreso into the minds of any such others with the same potential (human decency/empathy).
Also, IMO- it does not do our community (the trans community) globally or even within the US/west any favors IMO, to have token Uncle Toms joining in the empire's war machine, whatever their motivations. Just like Isntreal flying the trans or rainbow flags is no benefit- or like how Obama's election did no favors to the black and African communities within the US or outside it (as an Asian seeing what he did to Africa's most developed country and black wealth/homeownership in the US I have said I hope I don't see some Asian POTUS), etc.
Didn't a big poster start a struggle session and eventually got banned for defending the "troops are workers" position?
Yeah, 7deadlyfetishes, but I'm taking a very different position here. He more or less came at it from a position of tailism, that the left ought to try to appeal to troops to bring them in. I think something very different, the left still ought to be the vanguard in front, I'm just saying that dismissing the utility of the troops that might be politically aligned with our cause is a mistake. We shouldn't sacrifice even 1 bit of our correctness for the sake of appealing to fascists, troops, cops, etc etc. But you really mean to tell me with a straight face that the correct move, tactically or strategically, is to turn away any would-be collaborators within the institutions we oppose? When they might want to do exactly the same thing we want to do?
I agree with you. Besides, I think disenchantment can be a powerful motivator for somebody to go through a change in values, and start to act in reparation of their victims. It happened in South Africa, it's happening in Colombia, and it is a very important part of moving past damaging conflict.
15,000 marginalized people with military training that just got betrayed by their own government can, also, represent a tactical advantage.
True, but it's not like they're organized. If this was happening 10 years from now with an actual organized left that could quickly take the opportunity I'd more readily agree with you. Taking the opportunity away from us to turn these people into allies preemptively is surely a negative.
It does beg the question of where they'll go from here.
It hasn't happened yet.
Not a lot of time to get organized, but not impossible either... not that I expect anyone to even try.
Well yes, but as socialists we should be strategically in support of universal conscription. A volunteer army is not likely to produce these results...
Especially a volunteer army that is essentially a bunch of mercenaries serving to get college or $50,000 or whatever. A lot of them aren’t even signing up because of some misguided patriotism or whatever at this point.
US military is already admittedly understaffed. It's a particular problem in the Navy and Air Force. They haven't been meeting recruiting targets well at all and the article I read said they missed last year's target by 45,000. If these people are all just gun-toting boots then yeah it doesn't impact how things work. But if some amount of them are specialists it could cause severe strain and negligence in various parts like their ships not being repaired properly, their aircraft having problems, just all kinds of things that impact the machinery of the war machine itself that keep the more technical aspects above a bunch of people who handle M-16s and hang out in Japan or Germany.
I do not think the conditions yet exist for these people to be truly revolutionary. Remember they signed up for this. They weren't conscripts and comparing this to China's situation in their civil war is like comparing apples to horse-shoes. Those people in China's nationalist army were revolutionaries of a kind who wanted independence and self-determination for their country, many of them were misled into a certain kind of nationalism but upon discovering communism they were amenable to it given it fit their passions and goals and met them much more effectively because communism was a message of hope to these people given their history, that of their parents, etc. It allowed them to save and liberate their people, promised to rejuvenate their nation and has succeeded. What passions and goals does resisting the US government meet for people who joined up because they're willing to enable killing brown people for healthcare or college and other highly individually centered selfish goals? What's the similarity there?
They'll be upset yes and that's good. I'm glad there is tension there as should we all be glad that the empire isn't able to effectively do rainbow imperialism with people like Trump taking off the mask so much. But I don't think so upset they'll be revolutionary. Americans are incredibly atomized and 15,000 is frankly a drop in the bucket. Could some of them eventually become part of something? Sure but they don't represent any kind of collective force that's going to pop up in any meaningful numbers to defend the marginalized when Hitler-lite (D) takes office and tunes the repression machine higher. I mean right now we're in the middle of a genocide and the response is to crush college protests, to criminalize dissent against the zionist entity and classify it as racism and the response to that is liberals smugly blaming the left and saying we deserve it and collective feelings of despair and powerlessness.
Things are going to get much worse in the US before that revolutionary potential arrives and I don't think it will be these people frankly. I think they'll be in their 40s at least before that moment arrives and it will be some new group of people in or recently in the military when things hit the fan that will turn their guns around. I think between that moment arriving and now we will have a war with China and the way things are going maybe with Russia more directly too.
You have a very important point, war with China is much more proximal than revolutionary war. That changes the calculus. I think I stand by my belief that a fifth column is a required part of a successful leftist revolution against a militarized imperialist state; however it might be of greater utility for progressive forces outside the US for a large number of military specialists to be laid off without replacement. We'll see.
What do you mean by a 'fifth column'?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifth_column
Thanks!
I don't think it will do anything negative just like rainbow capitalism didn't do anything positive.
less labour-power in the military is good actually, and if it has a chance to cause internal conflict, even better.