Permanently Deleted

  • Comraragi [none/use name]
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 years ago

    Having a good faith discussion about when violence is justified is very different than gleefully reveling in the suffering of others.

    That is fair, but IMO people who don't have the stomach for violence will never be part of a revolution and may as well stop pretending like they support one. If your stomach turns because of the Romanovs then your stomach will turn when Bezos and co decides their bank accounts are worth more than their life, and they may have children and spouses and it will be up to them to decide if their life is worth more than their bank accounts.

    For what is worth I think there is a fundamental difference between outright fetishization and "preparation". You can be ready and understand the true cruelties of our society without making a post every 5 minutes whish for a guillotine, nobody needs to see or be reminded of this constantly.

    At the same time, we should accept the world is cruel and justice is relative, remember Marx's quote

    We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.

    • krothotkin [he/him]
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 years ago

      I will always reject that quote from Marx as being bad and wrong. Someone who makes no excuses for their terror is a monster, not a revolutionary.

      Killing the Romanov children was an abominable, cruel, and disgusting act. Shooting their family in front of them was an abominable, cruel, and disgusting act. Attempting to do something similar to another contemporary family would be wrong.

      This is not the popular opinion on this board, but it remains my firm conviction.

      • Pezevenk [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        Tbf Marx has other quotes praising the Paris commune for abstaining from unnecessary violence, "unlike bourgeois 'revolutions'". To understand that other quote, you have to first understand that terror didn't really mean the same thing it does now, and also he wrote it as a response to some monarch or whatever he was who shut down the newspaper the communists were publishing and prosecuted them, so it was more like a threat than a general rule.