sharing this for discussion, i have not read the book or seen the movie

  • Awoo [she/her]
    ·
    1 year ago

    If Trotsky wasn’t out their in the unorganized 1905 revolution, you think he would’ve been a leader in the 1917 revolution?

    I keep trying to impress the need to look at everything holistically rather than as individual events. While one single thing might not by itself achieve revolution it can have a significant contributory effect to future events through otherwise unknowable things occurring at that event.

    Struggle for the sake of struggle has value in producing more people that will engage in struggle, as well as giving people valuable experience that they take into future struggles.

    • Changeling [it/its]
      ·
      1 year ago

      For sure. Social infrastructure and cultural knowledge is built over time. Shit goes down and people are making calls asking if people they’ve met in the past are gonna be there. There’s a whole network of protest medics in the US who are interlocked with each other.

      So much of revolutionary potential is caught up not in general trends, but in the errata that alludes people specifically because it exists at the fringes. So we get very good at criticizing attempts at organizing because they failed due to the same trends we’ve seen over and over, but most of us never develop the skills necessary to praise the aspects of those failed attempts that went well, because the positives of failure exist in specifics.

      • Awoo [she/her]
        ·
        1 year ago

        Everything is easy to categorise as a failure until the revolution ultimately succeeds.