NEVER give up control of the military.
Why did the Soviet Union disintegrate? Why did the Communist Party of the Soviet Union fall to pieces? An important reason is that in the ideological domain, competition is fierce! To completely repudiate the historical experience of the Soviet Union, to repudiate the history of the CPSU, to repudiate Lenin, to repudiate Stalin was to wreck chaos in Soviet ideology and engage in historical nihilism. It caused Party organizations at all levels to have barely any function whatsoever. It robbed the Party of its leadership of the military. In the end the CPSU—as great a Party as it was—scattered like a flock of frightened beasts! The Soviet Union—as great a country as it was—shattered into a dozen pieces. This is a lesson from the past!
not just China but look at Chile and Venezuela, Allende got coup'd by the military, but in Venezuela, Chavez was saved by the combined forces of the masses and the military in the 2002 coup attempt. Chavez was a military man and even attempted a failed coup while he was in the military.
Noted, when my clearly more superior Southwest Texas Marxist-Leninist Party will beat out the Austin communist party and inevitably make communism manditory for all Americans accross the US i'll remember this nugget of info when I put pen to paper.
-7DeadlyFetishes
edit: hey mods, atleast suck my fat nuts before you remove my comment cause you can't handle the truth
First you have to take care of the Austin Red Guard, that's the most obvious fed op in history lmaooo.
Anyone else remember when they disappeared during the US government shutdown? And suddenly reappeared when the government came back to normal functioning? Lol
:fedposting:
"Hello comrade! Would you like to bomb a hospital in order to bring about communism? Please speak up, I'm hard of hearing."
Yeah, that one really pissed me off. Like fuck, maybe there's other ML parties in the world who should be concerned about the military?
lmao I make this comment as an offhand joke about how unrealistic thoery application and immediatly the theory heads come out swinging as if I give a shit about literally anything in this post
-7DeadlyFetishes
IDK your reply struck me as annoying cynicism. I apologize if it was just a joke. Why do we post anything on here? OP's take is a good one.
NEARLY ALL MY POSTS ARE JOKES I JUST HATE THEORY AND THEORYJERKING WHY IS EVERYONE HERE SO SATIRE ILLITERATE
-7DeadlyFetishes
I don't need to read a shitty dense book from the 1800s about linen or silver or some stupid shit like that to know that a country that creates poor people is probably a bad thing
-7DeadlyFetishes
Not reading theory is how you end up having shitty, chauvinistic takes like in this thread. You can do better.
If I can take the time to read your 2000 page fetish theory, you can take the time to read a 300 page book of political theory.
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.
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
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?
who would commit acts of horrible violence against the revolution and the proletariat.
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.
And how do you know exactly who would, for sure?
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.
what a profoundly reckless ideological wreckage you perpetuate here
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.
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.
You can’t just kill everyone you think might be a threat in the future, Mr. Pol Pot.
Don’t misgender me.
Alternately, try them for their crimes and execute them if it’s warranted.
So yeah, kill them. Go through whatever steps make you feel better.
Don’t misgender me.
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.
Ms. Pol Pot.
Thanks. Best insult during a stupid online argument I’ve gotten so far.
:wholesome:
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
this after outright stating that one should kill everybody who you assume will retaliate with violence
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
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
:think-mark: You aren't paranoid if they really are out to get you.:think-about-it:
