Also its worth noting that the based violence against the landlords also included local officials that worked with the landlords and local “law enforcements” and serifs and every kind of bootlicker. Basicaly not only the landlord class but also the “petty bourgeois” of the villages if you can say so.
I read once that -- because it was ultimately the people on the ground who determined punishments and carried them out -- it was not a blanket "kill everyone in this class" policy. The worst offenders (of which there were many) were killed, but some were exiled, some had all lands beyond their homestead taken away, some (probably the local officials you mention) were allowed to continue on basically as before, etc., all roughly scaled to what crimes the person had actually committed.
If I'm remembering correctly (and someone please jump in if I'm not) this makes those actions even more comprehensibly justifiable, because there was some individualized treatment baked in.
As we speak, masses of human shields are blocking courthouses and stalling evictions. Let me correct that, enfranchised Americans would be mowing down peasants and propping up fascists, but haven't they been doing that for all of US history? Let's be realistic here, BLM (in its actual on the ground contingencies) is pro-gun police abolition movement with direct demands to redistribute wealth to the proletarian classes. Their vanguard is largely comprised of MLs, MLMZT adherents, and AnComs who have managed to put the idea of full police defunding into the mainstream liberal discourse. When has this happened since the War On Drugs began? Never, not once. There were ideas before it in the 60s, but Americans were much more reactionary then and fell in line with Nixon's Southern Strategy.
What I'm saying is that we live in a time when GDP is dropping at double the rate of the Great Depression and electoralism at the national level is considered fully moot by the vast majority of Americans. Now compare this situation with other Anglo countries like NZ, Aus or UK. Sure they have better social safety nets now, but look at the people. Americans under 30 are mostly PoC and are radically anti-capitalist, don't give up the fight before it begins. If you do, BLM turns into liberal parades and progress gets set back a generation in reaction to liberal hypocrisy.
Right, it's why they work so hard to prevent organizing from reaching that level. Theres only 3/4 of a million cops in the whole country. They couldnt ever possibly hope to suppress an actual mass uprising of even ten million organized people, let alone half the country.
I don't know if you have your terms right. Lumpenproletariat is the underclass of chronically unemployable people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpenproletariat
Sometimes there's an inclusion of career criminals in the lumpenproles. Marx didn't see them as having revolutionary potential but Mao and the Black Panthers did.
deleted by creator
I read once that -- because it was ultimately the people on the ground who determined punishments and carried them out -- it was not a blanket "kill everyone in this class" policy. The worst offenders (of which there were many) were killed, but some were exiled, some had all lands beyond their homestead taken away, some (probably the local officials you mention) were allowed to continue on basically as before, etc., all roughly scaled to what crimes the person had actually committed.
If I'm remembering correctly (and someone please jump in if I'm not) this makes those actions even more comprehensibly justifiable, because there was some individualized treatment baked in.
man if that happened today America would be mowing down peasants and propping up fascists quicker than i can blink
As we speak, masses of human shields are blocking courthouses and stalling evictions. Let me correct that, enfranchised Americans would be mowing down peasants and propping up fascists, but haven't they been doing that for all of US history? Let's be realistic here, BLM (in its actual on the ground contingencies) is pro-gun police abolition movement with direct demands to redistribute wealth to the proletarian classes. Their vanguard is largely comprised of MLs, MLMZT adherents, and AnComs who have managed to put the idea of full police defunding into the mainstream liberal discourse. When has this happened since the War On Drugs began? Never, not once. There were ideas before it in the 60s, but Americans were much more reactionary then and fell in line with Nixon's Southern Strategy.
What I'm saying is that we live in a time when GDP is dropping at double the rate of the Great Depression and electoralism at the national level is considered fully moot by the vast majority of Americans. Now compare this situation with other Anglo countries like NZ, Aus or UK. Sure they have better social safety nets now, but look at the people. Americans under 30 are mostly PoC and are radically anti-capitalist, don't give up the fight before it begins. If you do, BLM turns into liberal parades and progress gets set back a generation in reaction to liberal hypocrisy.
The choice is yours, which side are you on?
deleted by creator
Right, it's why they work so hard to prevent organizing from reaching that level. Theres only 3/4 of a million cops in the whole country. They couldnt ever possibly hope to suppress an actual mass uprising of even ten million organized people, let alone half the country.
Give it till February. Fimbulwinter is coming and ordinary people are gonna be homeless.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I don't know if you have your terms right. Lumpenproletariat is the underclass of chronically unemployable people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpenproletariat
Sometimes there's an inclusion of career criminals in the lumpenproles. Marx didn't see them as having revolutionary potential but Mao and the Black Panthers did.
In modern parlance we refer to this as "Army of Thieves and removed" but some people want to amend it to "Army of Thieves and Sex Workers".
deleted by creator
deleted by creator