Will you be willing to repress the bourgeoisie after the revolution?

60 posts / 0 new
Last post
thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Nov 17 2007 00:44

Buncha pussies.

j.rogue
Offline
Joined: 8-04-07
Nov 17 2007 00:55

Dibs on executing trots.

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Nov 17 2007 00:57
j.rogue wrote:
Dibs on executing trots.

Dibs on executing anarchists.

Dust
Offline
Joined: 6-02-06
Dec 23 2014 11:33

.

Lone Wolf's picture
Lone Wolf
Offline
Joined: 1-03-06
Nov 17 2007 04:16

Gotta be honest - i don't think i would have a problem at all with taking the life of a human who has commited great acts of evil. And who would, if not stopped, continue to carry out such acts. In this, i have changed my views from when i was younger. Then i thought everyone was redeemable. Now i think some people have lost their souls forever.

To kill anyone other than under these circs eg accidentally would be devastating to me - it would be really hard for me to forgive myself for such a terrible error but i would have to make amends as best i could and get over myself othwise i would be no use.

I would only want to kill an animal to put it out of its pain. I would also do this for a human.

A tad off-topic i know but i do like this kinda life or death topic - it goes to the very root of the ethical choices we must make as human beings and as revolutionaries.

Love

LW XX

MJ's picture
MJ
Offline
Joined: 5-01-06
Nov 17 2007 05:11
Randy wrote:
MJ wrote:
...Based on my occasional experiences of being compelled to euthanize animals I can only imagine how horrible and emotionally crippling it would be to kill a human. ...

Is this a joke thread, or are you really that squeamish?

You've never got that "geez, hope I never have to do that to a person" feeling? Sicko.

Lone Wolf's picture
Lone Wolf
Offline
Joined: 1-03-06
Nov 17 2007 06:03
MJ wrote:
Randy wrote:
MJ wrote:
...Based on my occasional experiences of being compelled to euthanize animals I can only imagine how horrible and emotionally crippling it would be to kill a human. ...

Is this a joke thread, or are you really that squeamish?

You've never got that "geez, hope I never have to do that to a person" feeling? Sicko.

Better a guilty person to die than an innocent animal. black bloc circle A tongue

tastybrain
Offline
Joined: 11-11-07
Nov 17 2007 18:36
Dust wrote:
We don't attack people based om ideas or moral affiliation but on their role within society and what is useful in creating the society we want to see. The same applies to a post revolutionary society.

I agree with this. There are plenty of proles who have internalized capitalist values and ideology. Does this mean we execute them too? Being a "capitalist" is not really a matter of ideology but of class position. George Soros and other capitalists are motivated by humanitarian impulses that run counter to pure capitalism. Does that make them any less members of the bourgeois? It will be enough to give the means of production back to the people and take it away from the capitalists in my opinion. With their class smashed and their property gone, they will either assimilate into the body of society or become pathetic nostalgics of the past era. If our thesis as communists is correct, the vast majority of society will be content with the way things have been reorganized and will laugh at the prospect of returning to the capitalist dark ages. It will be a moot point anyway, because without their property and control over the media/ivory tower/school system they will have no way to pass on the values of capitalism to the next generation.

We should definitely execute the functionaries of capital and the state responsible for atrocities and war crimes. But any mass slaughter of the rich as a class is both immoral and bad strategic thinking.

In terms of the question of capitalist revolutionaries who start their own mini estates or whatever, we should certainly support the struggles of the proletariat in that area and help them overthrow the bastards. "The Revolution" is not going to be one massive event after which everything is peachy keen till the end of time. The revolution will have to be continuous, confronting rulers and owners in whatever new guise they come back in and defeating anyone who seeks power over others.

EDIT: Removed a certain sentence indicating my desire to harm certain politicians which could get me put on some list I don't want to be on. (or thrown in some kind of secret gulag????eek )

Randy
Offline
Joined: 31-01-07
Nov 17 2007 19:13
MJ wrote:
Randy wrote:
MJ wrote:
...Based on my occasional experiences of being compelled to euthanize animals I can only imagine how horrible and emotionally crippling it would be to kill a human. ...

Is this a joke thread, or are you really that squeamish?

You've never got that "geez, hope I never have to do that to a person" feeling? Sicko.

All joking aside, yes I've had to put a dog down, and it hurt. Because i loved the dog. But when I shoot a squirrel out of a tree, i whoop with delight, and cackle with pleasure while i clean it. "Helluva shot, wasn't it?" My seven year old daughter thinks it's pretty cool too. (And I was gunshot, a long, long time ago. That experience, um, focuses the attention.)

I suspect my feelings about how it would feel to "have to do that to a person", would be similarly conditioned by my feelings about the person. But that is just speculation, since i was never on that end of the barrel, with a human.

On the other hand, i read somewhere that working in a meat plant brings with it a rate of mental illness almost as bad as being a cop. And that may be closer to the systematic extermination you refer to.

There will come a time when difficult things will have to be done. No joke. I don't relish the prospect, but think it should be said sooner rather than later. But right now our movement has greater need of clear thinkers than marksmen or the like.

Feighnt
Offline
Joined: 20-07-06
Nov 17 2007 20:55
Randy wrote:
But when I shoot a squirrel out of a tree, i whoop with delight, and cackle with pleasure while i clean it.

you eat squirrel?

how does it taste?

Y's picture
Y
Offline
Joined: 16-11-07
Nov 17 2007 22:41

If classes still exist after the working class rule, then the other classes would be repressed. That's the nature of class rule. In a bourgeois democracy, the capitalists rule over the other classes. In a workers democracy, proles rule over other classes. Once the capitalists and landlords have been divested of their ownership of production and the Earth, they no longer exist as separate classes and will either have to join in associated production with the rest of us or go it alone. If they attempt to reinstate their class domination, they'll look as foolish and get about as far with the associated producers as the monarchists of today who try to reinstate feudalism within bourgeois democracies.

MJ's picture
MJ
Offline
Joined: 5-01-06
Nov 17 2007 22:48
MJ wrote:
The cop-out answer is that the revolution we want will abolish the working class, and any wannabe / retro bourgeois aspirant would be unable to get an economic foothold because nobody would have any need to alienate their labor-time. But let's face it -- it's a big, unevenly developed world facing energy scarcity and serious ecological and viral crises. It's not out of the question that armed parties of the bourgeoisie will be able to develop bases on islands, in deserts, sea platforms, jungles, etc., and develop their black markets to the point of exploiting refugee labor.

The same way, in our current, capitalist world, criminals, fascists and slave traders can create feudal or semifeudal enterprises that benefit from various crisis situations, we can envision renegade capitalists creating parasitic zones in which they lend security, stability, and wages to vulnerable populations.

tastybrain
Offline
Joined: 11-11-07
Nov 17 2007 22:56
MJ wrote:
MJ wrote:
The cop-out answer is that the revolution we want will abolish the working class, and any wannabe / retro bourgeois aspirant would be unable to get an economic foothold because nobody would have any need to alienate their labor-time. But let's face it -- it's a big, unevenly developed world facing energy scarcity and serious ecological and viral crises. It's not out of the question that armed parties of the bourgeoisie will be able to develop bases on islands, in deserts, sea platforms, jungles, etc., and develop their black markets to the point of exploiting refugee labor.

The same way, in our current, capitalist world, criminals, fascists and slave traders can create feudal or semifeudal enterprises that benefit from various crisis situations, we can envision renegade capitalists creating parasitic zones in which they lend security, stability, and wages to vulnerable populations.

Well, in that particular case, I would support "repressing" these retro hipster capitalists, in the same way I would support freed slaves going to other plantations and killing the owners. However, that's different then simply indiscriminately oppressing the former owning class, in that they have actively attempted to restore their class privilege.

petey
Offline
Joined: 13-10-05
Nov 17 2007 23:47
Randy wrote:
But when I shoot a squirrel out of a tree, i whoop with delight

go on, you do not.

Randy
Offline
Joined: 31-01-07
Nov 18 2007 00:11

Squirrel and rabbit have a "gamey" flavor that store bought meat can't touch. I love it. I don't hunt deer--too busy--but i eat it often, by the courtesy of friends. And yes, i get a big rush out of a well placed shot. my little girl doesn't hunt yet, but she loves squirrle, and cheers me on, and even (to my amazement) watches me clean game.

And you haven't tasted fish, till you have had grilled or sauted (sp?) bass from a freshwater stream.

Am i off topic yet?

Edit: Some of you may have tasted the difference between a garden tomato, and one of those mushy things in the supermarket that were picked green, gassed, trucked across the country and refrigerated. Similarly, there is a huge difference between eating game fed on a healthy diet in the wild, and meat of an animal that was fed processed grain in a cramped feed lot, shot full of hormones and antibiotics, and finally butchered.

Feighnt
Offline
Joined: 20-07-06
Nov 18 2007 04:10
Randy wrote:

Am i off topic yet?

depends on if you're gonna follow this post up with plans for eating the capitalists you shoot Mr. T

i'm sure they'd taste terrible, though.

El_Borrador
Offline
Joined: 15-04-07
Nov 18 2007 04:22
Quote:
We should definitely execute the functionaries of capital and the state responsible for atrocities and war crimes.

How does executing the people who ordered mass executions ensure that we are safe from mass executions? What does it do other than fulfill some archaic notion of the nature of "justice," which was created by the tyrants and rulers in the first place?

As far as repressing the bourgeoisie, after their means of production have been put into everybody's hands they won't really be bourgeoisie anymore. What can they do? They won't have much luck getting people to work for them, let alone fight and die for them. They can't rightly hire mercenaries when their money has no value. What we really should do is treat all people as equals, which to the rich and powerful will seem a dreadful punishment but to ordinary people a just and liberating change. I think that there's something to the reasoning that a proper revolution needs to be a complete refutation of all vestiges of the old society including their tactics of repression.

Lone Wolf's picture
Lone Wolf
Offline
Joined: 1-03-06
Nov 18 2007 04:33
El_Borrador wrote:
Quote:
We should definitely execute the functionaries of capital and the state responsible for atrocities and war crimes.

How does executing the people who ordered mass executions ensure that we are safe from mass executions? What does it do other than fulfill some archaic notion of the nature of "justice," which was created by the tyrants and rulers in the first place?

As far as repressing the bourgeoisie, after their means of production have been put into everybody's hands they won't really be bourgeoisie anymore. What can they do? They won't have much luck getting people to work for them, let alone fight and die for them. They can't rightly hire mercenaries when their money has no value. What we really should do is treat all people as equals, which to the rich and powerful will seem a dreadful punishment but to ordinary people a just and liberating change. I think that there's something to the reasoning that a proper revolution needs to be a complete refutation of all vestiges of the old society including their tactics of repression.

Good post esp. the bit in bold. lol.. you are right!

tastybrain
Offline
Joined: 11-11-07
Nov 18 2007 05:23
El_Borrador wrote:
Quote:
We should definitely execute the functionaries of capital and the state responsible for atrocities and war crimes.

How does executing the people who ordered mass executions ensure that we are safe from mass executions? What does it do other than fulfill some archaic notion of the nature of "justice," which was created by the tyrants and rulers in the first place?

Sorry, but the concept of "justice" is not at all archaic to me. On what basis do we overthrow the ruling class except on the basis of morality and equality - in other words, justice? Some of the human slugs that own this world have too much blood on their hands to be allowed to live. This is not "repression", unless the execution of Saddam Hussein or Adolph Hitler was repression. I agree that these executions need to be carried out by the people, not the state. But do you really think that the people who have been enslaving, abusing, murdering and torturing others, destroying other lives, should be allowed to continue theirs peacefully?

Again, I'm not talking about every rich or powerful person, just the people who are responsible for crimes against humanity.

MJ's picture
MJ
Offline
Joined: 5-01-06
Nov 18 2007 06:03
El_Borrador wrote:
They won't have much luck getting people to work for them,

This is precisely the cop-out answer described and challenged within the original post.

El_Borrador
Offline
Joined: 15-04-07
Nov 18 2007 07:01
Quote:
Sorry, but the concept of "justice" is not at all archaic to me.

Me neither, hence my use of it in a slightly different context further down the paragraph. However, I'm opposed to the "justice" of the bourgeoisie, that is the belief that might makes right and killing off people who did something wrong, even when they no longer pose a threat, is an unquestionable necessity. You hear reactionary minds saying that certain people need to be "brought to justice." But what does that even mean? What and who do such sentiments serve?

I think we need to strive for justice, but justice that isn't merely the same concept that has been trumpeted at us by the police and the judges for a thousand years. We need a conception of justice that actually represents morality and equality as you say, and goes out of its way to avoid hypocrisy and brutality.

Quote:
Some of the human slugs that own this world have too much blood on their hands to be allowed to live. This is not "repression", unless the execution of Saddam Hussein or Adolph Hitler was repression. I agree that these executions need to be carried out by the people, not the state. But do you really think that the people who have been enslaving, abusing, murdering and torturing others, destroying other lives, should be allowed to continue theirs peacefully?

Well if they are no longer in a position of power and authority over other people and no longer are able to harm anybody, then what is the point? Will it make anyone more safe? Will it refute the idea of mass murder (and what a strange way to refute it, by killing those who do endorse it!)

I'm not saying that you have to automatically forgive everyone that wrongs you if you're not emotionally able to do so. But I do think that punishment seems to be pretty damned fruitless. Holding a position of power over people is a disease really, and it doesn't seem right to just terminate everyone that's ill.

Quote:
This is precisely the cop-out answer described and challenged within the original post.

Can you envision Donald Trump and Bill Gates hiding in the woods with an M-16 and a transistor radio? Poeple like that have their dirty work done for them and it's no easy task when your assets have been dissolved.

Randy
Offline
Joined: 31-01-07
Nov 18 2007 11:34

I came to communist politics out of idealism, and disgust with the current state of affairs. Not surprisingly, given my idealism, I adopted a plan for a more-or-less peaceful general strike to bring down the power structure for good and all.

However, when I took this plan out of the abstract, and subjected it to a rigorous historical examination, i realized that (a)- no ruling class ever stepped down from the stage of history willingly. Rulers stop at nothing to keep power, including bloodbaths. General strikes *alone* are not sufficient to confront this force. It is immoral to ask legions of fellow workers to expend their lives in nonviolent resistance, that not a single capitalist be killed. Also, (b)- as has been said, revolutions are not begun on a given day, and ended on schedule. They are drawn out, messy, transitional affairs. I think most would agree that the revolution is Russia was "lost" over the long haul, not at the outset.

So yeah, some brutal repression will be necessary in the beginning, and for a while after. Appears to me the only reasonable question is, for how long will it be necessary? How long until the new society is so firmly entrenched that the capitalists are simply "retro hipsters" deserving of only dersion? Hard to say. But i think the distance between El_Borrador's concept of a communism is which capitalists can gain no foothold, and the period described by others in which they must be ruthlessly repressed, is best measured in years, decades, or centuries, rather than ideological degrees.

Bubbles's picture
Bubbles
Offline
Joined: 4-12-06
Nov 18 2007 11:45
guydebordisdead wrote:
Dear Bourgeoisie,

Regards,
Proletariat.

got to do something with the heads....

and the bodies...

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Nov 18 2007 14:40
tastybrain wrote:
This is not "repression", unless the execution of Saddam Hussein or Adolph Hitler was repression.

Minor point of historical accuracy - Hitler was not executed, he committed suicide.

Anyway, if the former bourgeoisie try to continue as things were before, I don't see that we'd have much alternative other than executing the bastards, personally, though if they manage to set up small capitalist island nations or something, as MJ suggests, it would have to be up to the people of those islands to free themselves. What else could we do but support that? Go in jackbooted and armed to the teeth and occupy the country?

tastybrain
Offline
Joined: 11-11-07
Nov 18 2007 20:07
madashell wrote:
tastybrain wrote:
This is not "repression", unless the execution of Saddam Hussein or Adolph Hitler was repression.

Minor point of historical accuracy - Hitler was not executed, he committed suicide.

Man do I feel stupid.... I was thinking of Rudolf Hess and the Nuremberg trials.

I think the main crux of the issue is how "repression" is defined. If "repression" is overthrowing members of the former ruling class trying to re-establish their positions of power, then yes, I would be willing to repress these capitalists after the revolution. As I have said previously, I don't think it will be that much of an issue. However, if repression is used in its traditional sense, and if you are envisioning some kind of Khmer Rouge situation, count me out.

Randy
Offline
Joined: 31-01-07
Nov 18 2007 20:50
tastybrain wrote:
...However, if repression is used in its traditional sense, and if you are envisioning some kind of Khmer Rouge situation, count me out.

I used to pal around with an organizer for the carpenters, and he would deliver the well timed punch line, "You know, sometimes i feel Pol Pot's pain."

At the risk of sounding/being simplistic, by whatever means necessary, but no more than necessary. For me at least, it's hard to say exactly what will be required when, from this vantage point.

j.rogue
Offline
Joined: 8-04-07
Nov 18 2007 20:55
Randy wrote:

I used to pal around with an organizer for the SEIU, and he would deliver the well timed punch line, "You know, sometimes i feel Pol Pot's pain."

.

Fixed?

thugarchist's picture
thugarchist
Offline
Joined: 26-11-06
Nov 19 2007 01:13
j.rogue wrote:
Randy wrote:

I used to pal around with an organizer for the SEIU, and he would deliver the well timed punch line, "You know, sometimes i feel Pol Pot's pain."

.

Fixed?

THIS IS YEAR ZERO!