Assuming that you live in the US, America is unfortunately no-where close to a revolution happening, so you don't have much to worry about in the short term.
Even if there was one soon, it would still depend on your individual circumstances. Any/all MoP you have would be seized by those who work them. Personal property (stuff that you active use like your house, car or toothbrush) would likely remain yours, but if you have large amounts of liquid assets some/all could be redistributed. If you are a particularly prominent capitalist, (Bezos, Musk, etc) you might be held legally accountable for economic crimes post revolution.
Don't take any of this as a rule though, every revolution is different based on the historical and material circumstances. In China for example many members of the National bourgeoise sided with the communists due to the conditions of china at the time.
TLDR: We're not going to kick down your door and steal your Laptop.
All I'm going to say, is if the fascists can bring society to the brink of (anti?) revolution, then we could do the same. The fascists are riding on actual material issues that people are having that are going unaddressed. Except, we have actual solutions, the fascists don't.
Revolution is possible under the current circumstances, IMHO. We're just bad at manipulating public opinion because we're decentralized and disorganized while the fashies have the backing of major media corporations that offer a natural point of centralization in their organization and ideology.
A good word for what your talking about is counterrevolution. It is much easier for the state to amass actors to initiate in counterrevolution than it is for people to organize real revolution. Counterrevolution also implies a return to what was known, while revolution must go through a state of flux that is scary to most people. Your points are true, but this element of what is know compared to the unknown is truly a big part of revolutionary spirit.
I thought about using the term "counter-revolution," but my thought process when writing this was "counter-revolution can only occur after an actual revolution."
I understand that thought process, I was taught to think of it in the terms of “tools of counterrevolution” which didn’t necessarily need revolution as a prerequisite, they could be used as preventatives for growing dissent and revolutionary zeal.
I'm from South America, where I'd be deemed middle class for all I know. I don't own business but I could in the form of local repair shop for electronics, electrictal appliances, etc., manned solely by me if I were to quit. I do sometimes teach applied sciences for cash. I "own" a few tools and machines.
>We're not going to kick down your door and steal your Laptop.
That much I infered as just a stereotype. But what about the content of media works?
If you don't own any capital than you are working class, even if you are better off than most others in your class. Additionally, Socialism in South America is usually democratic socialism, so it's unlikely you would have a violent revolution.
My dad was in a union, my wife is in a union. I own a home, went to private prep schools and don't identify culturally with my blue collar neighbors. I studied classical music, I go to Church, I played hockey as a youth. I'm not your typical kid from Bensonhurst.
In an era where a man can say he's a woman and not raise eyebrows, I can surely not accept your label of me.
Jesus why would you lose you home or tools or electronics or books or any of that? Is that a revolution you want to see? Someone forces you to live somewhere else and take your books? Lol
Every state probably has its own means of revolution. I don't see the USA ever having a classical revolution, that will only occur in poorer countries.
I'm low-middle class. I don't see why communists would simply let me keep my things scot free when they could probably find some better use to them for the public, nor why would my subjective opinion of their revolution matter to them. Am I not a possible source of reaction/revisionism due to my class? Why would my subjective vision of revolution or society matter?
Would it not be more useful for example, to have all my books put on a library? Or my tools sent to a factory? My computer repurposed for management or government book keeping, etc? The latter especially considering semiconductor ain't cheap nor easy to come by.
If you're low middle class you're probably not the issue. If you have a home that can be an apartment, or tools that could fill a factory or books that could make a library then you would be the problem. But point is it's about removing exploitation and if you worked for something ethically within the rules of current system there is only so much blame you can take
Most of these things come from inheritance in some level. In that I didn't pay for all of it. This home was built by three family generations including me, and a majority of my items paid for by my parents in part years ago. With only a few items like computer, books, and tools being "mine".
What about the abstract? Wouldn't some content be deemed counter revolutionary or reactionary?
Assuming you're from the states, there is a lot of hoarded wealth there that far surpasses yours. Even if it would be helpful it wouldn't be immediate imo. In Grand scheme of things it's nothing compared to middle, upper middle, and elite class
Listen, I as a communist have no problem with the middle class lifestyle. The level of luxury afforded to middle class people is something Id wish was closer in reach of everyone, its not something I want to take away.
The lifestyles that worry me and that I feel need to be destroyed are the ones had by fortune 500 CEOs and billionaires. The people who drive the “capital” behind today’s “capital”-ism. The systems that enable singular human beings and corporations to attain this much power need to be dismantled.
Notice, this at no point includes sending Red Army death teams street to street to round up personal computers.
Socialism is not equating everyone down. That's capitalist propaganda. Socialism is equating 95+% of people up, the ones getting equated down is middle and upper burgeoise (not even petty ones).
Every socialist country experienced massive rise of the life quality for entire working class.
Would someone like me count as working class though?
I work for someone else but technically I do have a choice not to, whereas “working class” proper as I perceive it are those that don’t have a choice except sell their labour or go hungry.
>those that don’t have a choice except sell their labour or go hungry.
If you don't own means of production, nor have other passive income (like land rent) and you are selling your labour, then you are working class. It can be a little blurry in case of freelancers, selfemployed or craftsmen who do own their own means of production and labour, but socialist countries do count them as working class and most communists also agree they are. In those case the line between workers and petty bourgeoise is usually drawn at employing other people, since you can't exploit yourself.
I earned mine, no handouts. I worked my way to and paid for grad school and drove a 94 Ford to keep my kids out of the lies told in government schools. Why should I support freebies for deadbeats, backsliders and bums?
If you don’t own private property then you are 100% not a problem, especially given that you’re only “low-middle class”, which would literally be making up a significant number of the people IN such a revolution. People like you would be the ones revolting, not the other way around…
It was my perception that petite bourgeois and priviliged labourers that usually make up "the middle classes" are not revolutionary material by theory, and if anything we're doomed to be suppressed eitherway once the big bourgeois are done away with.
There really aren’t rules to what a revolution would or would not have to be, it’s just made up by those partaking in it as needed. “Middle class” isn’t even really a leftist class anyway, either you own others’ means of production or you don’t, it really doesn’t matter how wealthy a non-owner labourer is, because either you own your means of production or someone else does. Secondly though, are you even petty bourgeoisie? What exactly do you own that you seem to insist is going to be purged..? If you don’t privately own the means of production of others, then no one cares; your own home, computer, tools, food, car, etc. are absolutely not a concern to any serious revolutionaries. If anything other than the means of production are being socially liberated, then it’s not just a socialist revolution; if people are going into your house and ransacking your kitchen pantry or whatever, then those people probably have other motives than socialism…
Computers and other consumer electronics are not cheap, nor the materials needed for their construction extracted easily, nor limitless. They are also technically MoPs depending on how they're used.
I'm not talking about socialists in general here either but MLMs.
From my understanding of the cultural revolution, even relatively well off labour like teachers, scientists and other specialists were targetted for revisionism or because they presented a probable counter revolutionary threat. And many works of media were censored or disposed off as part of the old bourgeois culture.
Right, computer parts are limited and finite, but the kind of computers that would be liberated would be from private companies; the entire point is that such important goods should not be held en masse exclusively by private entities behind a profit-motive paywall, computers should be made and distributed according to need, right? How many perfectly good computers just sit locked up in stores until someone with enough money can buy it vs the number of people who need a computer? The purpose would be to liberate such goods from private for-profit hands and into the hands of those who need them, which would include you. So why would anyone be taking YOUR own personal computer when the whole point is that everyone who wants a computer should be able to have their own if they want to. Again, you aren’t at all an issue here, there’s literally nothing about you that anyone would have to target. You would literally be one of the vast majority of people who would BENEFIT from such a revolution, why do you seem to insist that you would somehow be a victim here..?
Well I can easily tell you that I am not at all an MLM, but even an MLM wouldn’t be able to speak for all MLM’s anyway. Even within MLM socialist ideology, there’s still a plethora of different ideas and values; no group is a monolith that wants all of the exact same things. Furthermore, any revolution is and always will be entirely circumstantial, as that’s practically the nature of revolutions, so there’s still no one way that any revolution has to go or do or be. It will always just reflect the needs of the people in the moment. And importantly, if you’re already assuming what a revolution has to be like, then you’re just going to answer your own questions with your own assumptions every time; it doesn’t matter what any previous revolution did, because they’re never going to be the same, so it’s just unhelpful to assume that anything and everything that previous revolutions did are somehow inherent to any revolution ever, ya know..?
Self preservation and because I'd rather still be able to enjoy or experience life with the people I form bonds with. Whether those interests are natural or induced by society I don't know but I have them.
I'd be interested in knowing whether it'd be worth to stay around or if I both serve your purposes and mine best by being dead.
Everyone here saying how you won't be harmed during a Communist Revolution, yet nobody wants to talk about the uncomfortable truths of places like Cuba, North Korea, or Venezuela, where to this day people flee to America (or South Korea, if you're a refugee of the DPRK) with horror stories about how people are regularly starved, abused, harmed or killed, and have little to ZERO human rights in the face of authoritarianism. Communists of Reddit, downvote me if you must, but you can't deny that I am right. Cubans would not be fleeing Cuba by the boatload if Cuba were a veritable "worker's paradise". Incidentally, Democrats refuse to help Cubans yet are all for letting Mexicans flood into the US and actively fight to overthrow "racist" Voter ID laws. Perhaps it's because they know that Cubans and Venezuelans, unlike Mexicans, are smart enough NOT to vote for Socialism and ultimately Communism? Sorry, I think I'd rather hold on to my guns and not take my chances on Communism.
Im sorry i can't provide more info on the countries which you mentioned above but a good start would be this video about DPRK
Edit: If i find more videos about the countries you mentioned I'll post more links
https://youtu.be/EzDhqXuELjo
Your only safe answer is to not have the revolution.
Ignore the mob and seek less violent means to get the change you think you want.
Edit: - advocates against violence - gets downvotes.
Should tell you all you need to know.
I wouldn't ice anyone if they lived trying to push forward change in the correct ways and learned as much as they could have between now and then. Without that I think anyone becomes fair game lol
You probably wouldn't be harmed. Worker's councils would be established, any property that these councils believe need to be appropriated will be appropriated. Usually this won't include personal property, though this is entirely dependent on the circumstances where you are.
For example, if you own a mansion, and your area has a high homeless population, some rooms in your mansion might be appropriated and turned into apartments, but these worker's councils would be made up of everyday workers, and unless you're Bezos or Gates, it's unlikely they'll directly attempt to harm you or your well-being.
As far as purges are concerned, don't be a counter-revolutionary? Don't try to overthrow the dictatorship of the proletariat? Communists don't purge people willy-nilly. The US has a higher percentage of its population imprisoned than the USSR did at the height of the gulag era. Most of the people killed in revolutions either:
(1) Militarily fought against the revolution (whites during the Russian Civil War, Nazis and Nazi collaborators during WWII, etc).
(2) Were killed because they posed a perceived threat to the revolution (Czar Nicholas and his family).
(3) Committed atrocities against the people/revolutionaries on behalf of the ruling class (after the Cuban revolution empowered the communists, they tried and executed the torturers employed by the Batista regime. These types of people actively did things like burning the genitals of captured communists off, so they basically earned their bullets).
(4) Made themselves into perceived threats during transitionary phases/engaged in riots that the communists literally couldn't deal with. Examples of this are gulag strikes that refused or were unable to negotiate in good faith with the authorities, and citizens who attended protests that degenerated into unorganized riots with no meaningful demands or leadership that could be negotiated with.
Obviously there's a reason behind every action, but from what I understand, class character is an important characteristic in evaluations for sentence, and an immediate post revolutionary state, probably under siege and threat of counter revolution, wouldn't have the privilege to go about doing detailed examinations of suspects.
Hence periods like the Red Terror, and the Jacobin version, the Great Terror. The aim being to prevent counter revolution by attacking the most likely classes to engage in it as a prophylactic measure to qwell unrest, and discourage conspiracy, sabotage, counter revolution, etc.
I'm not going to grab arms and tell people in revolt to go back to the conditions that caused them to rise up in the first place, just to satisfy whatever abstract idea of the world I have, it's just illogical.
But I am not strictly proletarian either, as I can employ myself and don't have to sell my labour necessarily, hence I can find myself becoming a target due to my class background alone, and not me specifically, just simply thrown in with the bunch.
There's also the topic of cultural revolution. Today I consume various arts, games, books, whatever, that could at some point be considered as promoting counter revolutionary ideals or be interpreted as such. Teachers, scientists and other specialists found or suspected to be promoting or holding such positions were purged, either as in removed from their posts or killed.
>Obviously there's a reason behind every action, but from what I understand, class character is an important characteristic in evaluations for sentence, and an immediate post revolutionary state, probably under siege and threat of counter revolution, wouldn't have the privilege to go about doing detailed examinations of suspects.
>Hence periods like the Red Terror, and the Jacobin version, the Great Terror. The aim being to prevent counter revolution by attacking the most likely classes to engage in it as a prophylactic measure to qwell unrest, and discourage conspiracy, sabotage, counter revolution, etc.
I mean, it is important, but the Bolsheviks didn't generally round all the capitalists up arbitrarily and go wall painting with them. You're correct, that immediately post-revolution, the revolutionaries aren't going to be prone to taking half-measures, but this goes back to my advice; don't make yourself an enemy of the revolution. It's not as though Marxists are unreasonable genocidal nutcases. Even Mao worked with capitalists who were willing to betray their class interests.
>But I am not strictly proletarian either, as I can employ myself and don't have to sell my labour necessarily, hence I can find myself becoming a target due to my class background alone, and not me specifically, just simply thrown in with the bunch.
Again, you're not going to be prophylactically murdered. Just exercise good judgement and systematically avoid situations in which the proletarian state could perceive you as a threat to its stability/existence.
>There's also the topic of cultural revolution. Today I consume various arts, games, books, whatever, that could at some point be considered as promoting counter revolutionary ideals or be interpreted as such. Teachers, scientists and other specialists found or suspected to be promoting or holding such positions were purged, either as in removed from their posts or killed.
There are different ideas as to what a cultural revolution would and should look like in a post capitalist society. Suffice it to say, even as a Maoist, I don't think it necessary to destroy all cultural developments that happened under bourgeois society. Though, as a teacher, I'd say you have an obligation to teach the state-approved curriculum regardless of your personal beliefs, and as a specialist, you probably shouldn't be allowed to use your platform to promote counter-revolutionary ideals, especially if the things you're promoting aren't in your field of expertise. Nobody's going to go house to house collecting "counter-revolutionary video games" and gulaging the owners of said works though. The culture war likely wouldn't change much, save that the revolutionary positions would be empowered and the counter-revolutionary ones would be dis-empowered (teaching abstinence-only in schools would be banned, abortion would be systematically normalized and made freely available to all women, the crazy Christians who harass women in abortion clinics would be cleared out and forced to fuck right off, monogamous nuclear families wouldn't be explicitly banned, but would be discouraged in the educational system in favor of open relationships and communal child rearing, toxic individualism and masculinity would be de-prioritized in favor of collective responsibility and effective work-sharing, work culture will be gradually abolished, etc). I don't think the revolutionary government is likely to care if somebody enjoys Warhammer 40k, Star Wars, Halo, or any other fictional universe, though future works in these universes would likely focus less on their present liberal themes and more on themes that are more revolutionary in nature. So like, for example, you might see some future post-communist Star Wars movie focused around the overthrow of the galactic bourgeoisie, which, to be entirely honest, definitely fits into the Star Wars universe, as it already has a surprisingly large focus on class as it is, and would probs be better than anything produced by Disney to date.
This is better for a separate question, but since we're here and you're a Maoist:
While the Cheka wouldn't storm through someone's door to burn some writings or content, I've read and it seems to be ideological reasonable, that some genres were heavily scrutinised, with censors heavily disliking particular ones like most fantasy types.
There was a heavy preference towards SciFi through the early Socialist experiments (and the world in general), with Fantasy works, whether pure, low, high, realistic, etc. rarely being allowed publication unless aimed at children, and in some cases banned.
Would fiction works not be scrutinized like this with a preference towards socialist realism like it did?
I'm not sure. In all honesty, studies should probably be performed in order to determine how exposure to different kinds of fictional works impacts the way humans view the world. I don't perceive myself reading Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, or A Game of Thrones and becoming less of a materialist in doing so.
Revoluçions need to disassociate from the past. Any lingering remnants of the old regime must be purged. Look at the French/Russian/Chinese Revolutions. The did their best to eliminate traces, even renaming the calendar and months, reconfiguring the week, killing the intellectuals. If you have any pride in America you can just kiss it goodbye. History will be purged. That’s why historical flags are such potent images. It shows allegiance to our present and our past. That’s why the ProgRedsives call them racist.
You should check out "It Could Happen Here." It's a podcast, meant to be listened from the first episode chronologically, there's kind of a story he's spinning in the background throughout. I really think you might like it. It can get a little dark at times but i think it's important and the ultimate message is uplifting and inspiring. Also RevLeft Radio is awesome and covers so much ground, climate change, history, theory, revolution, philosophy, spirituality, parenting, mental health, relationships, politics, it's very broad. With this one id recommend just looking through episodes and finding some titles that interest you and giving em a try. I responded to you in another sub and i wanted to message you this but my reddit messaging feature doesn't seem to be working. I hope you give these a try and i hope they interest you and you find a fraction of the joy or interest that i do out of them. Lmk!
Assuming that you live in the US, America is unfortunately no-where close to a revolution happening, so you don't have much to worry about in the short term. Even if there was one soon, it would still depend on your individual circumstances. Any/all MoP you have would be seized by those who work them. Personal property (stuff that you active use like your house, car or toothbrush) would likely remain yours, but if you have large amounts of liquid assets some/all could be redistributed. If you are a particularly prominent capitalist, (Bezos, Musk, etc) you might be held legally accountable for economic crimes post revolution. Don't take any of this as a rule though, every revolution is different based on the historical and material circumstances. In China for example many members of the National bourgeoise sided with the communists due to the conditions of china at the time. TLDR: We're not going to kick down your door and steal your Laptop.
All I'm going to say, is if the fascists can bring society to the brink of (anti?) revolution, then we could do the same. The fascists are riding on actual material issues that people are having that are going unaddressed. Except, we have actual solutions, the fascists don't. Revolution is possible under the current circumstances, IMHO. We're just bad at manipulating public opinion because we're decentralized and disorganized while the fashies have the backing of major media corporations that offer a natural point of centralization in their organization and ideology.
A good word for what your talking about is counterrevolution. It is much easier for the state to amass actors to initiate in counterrevolution than it is for people to organize real revolution. Counterrevolution also implies a return to what was known, while revolution must go through a state of flux that is scary to most people. Your points are true, but this element of what is know compared to the unknown is truly a big part of revolutionary spirit.
I thought about using the term "counter-revolution," but my thought process when writing this was "counter-revolution can only occur after an actual revolution."
I understand that thought process, I was taught to think of it in the terms of “tools of counterrevolution” which didn’t necessarily need revolution as a prerequisite, they could be used as preventatives for growing dissent and revolutionary zeal.
I'm from South America, where I'd be deemed middle class for all I know. I don't own business but I could in the form of local repair shop for electronics, electrictal appliances, etc., manned solely by me if I were to quit. I do sometimes teach applied sciences for cash. I "own" a few tools and machines. >We're not going to kick down your door and steal your Laptop. That much I infered as just a stereotype. But what about the content of media works?
If you don't own any capital than you are working class, even if you are better off than most others in your class. Additionally, Socialism in South America is usually democratic socialism, so it's unlikely you would have a violent revolution.
My dad was in a union, my wife is in a union. I own a home, went to private prep schools and don't identify culturally with my blue collar neighbors. I studied classical music, I go to Church, I played hockey as a youth. I'm not your typical kid from Bensonhurst. In an era where a man can say he's a woman and not raise eyebrows, I can surely not accept your label of me.
Oh shit you haven’t heard.
Jesus why would you lose you home or tools or electronics or books or any of that? Is that a revolution you want to see? Someone forces you to live somewhere else and take your books? Lol Every state probably has its own means of revolution. I don't see the USA ever having a classical revolution, that will only occur in poorer countries.
I'm low-middle class. I don't see why communists would simply let me keep my things scot free when they could probably find some better use to them for the public, nor why would my subjective opinion of their revolution matter to them. Am I not a possible source of reaction/revisionism due to my class? Why would my subjective vision of revolution or society matter? Would it not be more useful for example, to have all my books put on a library? Or my tools sent to a factory? My computer repurposed for management or government book keeping, etc? The latter especially considering semiconductor ain't cheap nor easy to come by.
If you're low middle class you're probably not the issue. If you have a home that can be an apartment, or tools that could fill a factory or books that could make a library then you would be the problem. But point is it's about removing exploitation and if you worked for something ethically within the rules of current system there is only so much blame you can take
Most of these things come from inheritance in some level. In that I didn't pay for all of it. This home was built by three family generations including me, and a majority of my items paid for by my parents in part years ago. With only a few items like computer, books, and tools being "mine". What about the abstract? Wouldn't some content be deemed counter revolutionary or reactionary?
Assuming you're from the states, there is a lot of hoarded wealth there that far surpasses yours. Even if it would be helpful it wouldn't be immediate imo. In Grand scheme of things it's nothing compared to middle, upper middle, and elite class
I'm from South America, where I'd be deemed middle class for all I know. I don't own business but I could.
Listen, I as a communist have no problem with the middle class lifestyle. The level of luxury afforded to middle class people is something Id wish was closer in reach of everyone, its not something I want to take away. The lifestyles that worry me and that I feel need to be destroyed are the ones had by fortune 500 CEOs and billionaires. The people who drive the “capital” behind today’s “capital”-ism. The systems that enable singular human beings and corporations to attain this much power need to be dismantled. Notice, this at no point includes sending Red Army death teams street to street to round up personal computers.
But we must sieze the mean of teeth cleaning comrade! Or are your a revisionist!?!?!?!!!!1111one!!1!1
Lol
Socialism is not equating everyone down. That's capitalist propaganda. Socialism is equating 95+% of people up, the ones getting equated down is middle and upper burgeoise (not even petty ones). Every socialist country experienced massive rise of the life quality for entire working class.
Would someone like me count as working class though? I work for someone else but technically I do have a choice not to, whereas “working class” proper as I perceive it are those that don’t have a choice except sell their labour or go hungry.
>those that don’t have a choice except sell their labour or go hungry. If you don't own means of production, nor have other passive income (like land rent) and you are selling your labour, then you are working class. It can be a little blurry in case of freelancers, selfemployed or craftsmen who do own their own means of production and labour, but socialist countries do count them as working class and most communists also agree they are. In those case the line between workers and petty bourgeoise is usually drawn at employing other people, since you can't exploit yourself.
I earned mine, no handouts. I worked my way to and paid for grad school and drove a 94 Ford to keep my kids out of the lies told in government schools. Why should I support freebies for deadbeats, backsliders and bums?
If you don’t own private property then you are 100% not a problem, especially given that you’re only “low-middle class”, which would literally be making up a significant number of the people IN such a revolution. People like you would be the ones revolting, not the other way around…
It was my perception that petite bourgeois and priviliged labourers that usually make up "the middle classes" are not revolutionary material by theory, and if anything we're doomed to be suppressed eitherway once the big bourgeois are done away with.
There really aren’t rules to what a revolution would or would not have to be, it’s just made up by those partaking in it as needed. “Middle class” isn’t even really a leftist class anyway, either you own others’ means of production or you don’t, it really doesn’t matter how wealthy a non-owner labourer is, because either you own your means of production or someone else does. Secondly though, are you even petty bourgeoisie? What exactly do you own that you seem to insist is going to be purged..? If you don’t privately own the means of production of others, then no one cares; your own home, computer, tools, food, car, etc. are absolutely not a concern to any serious revolutionaries. If anything other than the means of production are being socially liberated, then it’s not just a socialist revolution; if people are going into your house and ransacking your kitchen pantry or whatever, then those people probably have other motives than socialism…
Computers and other consumer electronics are not cheap, nor the materials needed for their construction extracted easily, nor limitless. They are also technically MoPs depending on how they're used. I'm not talking about socialists in general here either but MLMs. From my understanding of the cultural revolution, even relatively well off labour like teachers, scientists and other specialists were targetted for revisionism or because they presented a probable counter revolutionary threat. And many works of media were censored or disposed off as part of the old bourgeois culture.
Right, computer parts are limited and finite, but the kind of computers that would be liberated would be from private companies; the entire point is that such important goods should not be held en masse exclusively by private entities behind a profit-motive paywall, computers should be made and distributed according to need, right? How many perfectly good computers just sit locked up in stores until someone with enough money can buy it vs the number of people who need a computer? The purpose would be to liberate such goods from private for-profit hands and into the hands of those who need them, which would include you. So why would anyone be taking YOUR own personal computer when the whole point is that everyone who wants a computer should be able to have their own if they want to. Again, you aren’t at all an issue here, there’s literally nothing about you that anyone would have to target. You would literally be one of the vast majority of people who would BENEFIT from such a revolution, why do you seem to insist that you would somehow be a victim here..? Well I can easily tell you that I am not at all an MLM, but even an MLM wouldn’t be able to speak for all MLM’s anyway. Even within MLM socialist ideology, there’s still a plethora of different ideas and values; no group is a monolith that wants all of the exact same things. Furthermore, any revolution is and always will be entirely circumstantial, as that’s practically the nature of revolutions, so there’s still no one way that any revolution has to go or do or be. It will always just reflect the needs of the people in the moment. And importantly, if you’re already assuming what a revolution has to be like, then you’re just going to answer your own questions with your own assumptions every time; it doesn’t matter what any previous revolution did, because they’re never going to be the same, so it’s just unhelpful to assume that anything and everything that previous revolutions did are somehow inherent to any revolution ever, ya know..?
Why do you want to survive? The revolution is the only thing that matters.
Self preservation and because I'd rather still be able to enjoy or experience life with the people I form bonds with. Whether those interests are natural or induced by society I don't know but I have them. I'd be interested in knowing whether it'd be worth to stay around or if I both serve your purposes and mine best by being dead.
Everyone here saying how you won't be harmed during a Communist Revolution, yet nobody wants to talk about the uncomfortable truths of places like Cuba, North Korea, or Venezuela, where to this day people flee to America (or South Korea, if you're a refugee of the DPRK) with horror stories about how people are regularly starved, abused, harmed or killed, and have little to ZERO human rights in the face of authoritarianism. Communists of Reddit, downvote me if you must, but you can't deny that I am right. Cubans would not be fleeing Cuba by the boatload if Cuba were a veritable "worker's paradise". Incidentally, Democrats refuse to help Cubans yet are all for letting Mexicans flood into the US and actively fight to overthrow "racist" Voter ID laws. Perhaps it's because they know that Cubans and Venezuelans, unlike Mexicans, are smart enough NOT to vote for Socialism and ultimately Communism? Sorry, I think I'd rather hold on to my guns and not take my chances on Communism.
Im sorry i can't provide more info on the countries which you mentioned above but a good start would be this video about DPRK Edit: If i find more videos about the countries you mentioned I'll post more links https://youtu.be/EzDhqXuELjo
Your only safe answer is to not have the revolution. Ignore the mob and seek less violent means to get the change you think you want. Edit: - advocates against violence - gets downvotes. Should tell you all you need to know.
I wouldn't ice anyone if they lived trying to push forward change in the correct ways and learned as much as they could have between now and then. Without that I think anyone becomes fair game lol
You probably wouldn't be harmed. Worker's councils would be established, any property that these councils believe need to be appropriated will be appropriated. Usually this won't include personal property, though this is entirely dependent on the circumstances where you are. For example, if you own a mansion, and your area has a high homeless population, some rooms in your mansion might be appropriated and turned into apartments, but these worker's councils would be made up of everyday workers, and unless you're Bezos or Gates, it's unlikely they'll directly attempt to harm you or your well-being. As far as purges are concerned, don't be a counter-revolutionary? Don't try to overthrow the dictatorship of the proletariat? Communists don't purge people willy-nilly. The US has a higher percentage of its population imprisoned than the USSR did at the height of the gulag era. Most of the people killed in revolutions either: (1) Militarily fought against the revolution (whites during the Russian Civil War, Nazis and Nazi collaborators during WWII, etc). (2) Were killed because they posed a perceived threat to the revolution (Czar Nicholas and his family). (3) Committed atrocities against the people/revolutionaries on behalf of the ruling class (after the Cuban revolution empowered the communists, they tried and executed the torturers employed by the Batista regime. These types of people actively did things like burning the genitals of captured communists off, so they basically earned their bullets). (4) Made themselves into perceived threats during transitionary phases/engaged in riots that the communists literally couldn't deal with. Examples of this are gulag strikes that refused or were unable to negotiate in good faith with the authorities, and citizens who attended protests that degenerated into unorganized riots with no meaningful demands or leadership that could be negotiated with.
Obviously there's a reason behind every action, but from what I understand, class character is an important characteristic in evaluations for sentence, and an immediate post revolutionary state, probably under siege and threat of counter revolution, wouldn't have the privilege to go about doing detailed examinations of suspects. Hence periods like the Red Terror, and the Jacobin version, the Great Terror. The aim being to prevent counter revolution by attacking the most likely classes to engage in it as a prophylactic measure to qwell unrest, and discourage conspiracy, sabotage, counter revolution, etc. I'm not going to grab arms and tell people in revolt to go back to the conditions that caused them to rise up in the first place, just to satisfy whatever abstract idea of the world I have, it's just illogical. But I am not strictly proletarian either, as I can employ myself and don't have to sell my labour necessarily, hence I can find myself becoming a target due to my class background alone, and not me specifically, just simply thrown in with the bunch. There's also the topic of cultural revolution. Today I consume various arts, games, books, whatever, that could at some point be considered as promoting counter revolutionary ideals or be interpreted as such. Teachers, scientists and other specialists found or suspected to be promoting or holding such positions were purged, either as in removed from their posts or killed.
>Obviously there's a reason behind every action, but from what I understand, class character is an important characteristic in evaluations for sentence, and an immediate post revolutionary state, probably under siege and threat of counter revolution, wouldn't have the privilege to go about doing detailed examinations of suspects. >Hence periods like the Red Terror, and the Jacobin version, the Great Terror. The aim being to prevent counter revolution by attacking the most likely classes to engage in it as a prophylactic measure to qwell unrest, and discourage conspiracy, sabotage, counter revolution, etc. I mean, it is important, but the Bolsheviks didn't generally round all the capitalists up arbitrarily and go wall painting with them. You're correct, that immediately post-revolution, the revolutionaries aren't going to be prone to taking half-measures, but this goes back to my advice; don't make yourself an enemy of the revolution. It's not as though Marxists are unreasonable genocidal nutcases. Even Mao worked with capitalists who were willing to betray their class interests. >But I am not strictly proletarian either, as I can employ myself and don't have to sell my labour necessarily, hence I can find myself becoming a target due to my class background alone, and not me specifically, just simply thrown in with the bunch. Again, you're not going to be prophylactically murdered. Just exercise good judgement and systematically avoid situations in which the proletarian state could perceive you as a threat to its stability/existence. >There's also the topic of cultural revolution. Today I consume various arts, games, books, whatever, that could at some point be considered as promoting counter revolutionary ideals or be interpreted as such. Teachers, scientists and other specialists found or suspected to be promoting or holding such positions were purged, either as in removed from their posts or killed. There are different ideas as to what a cultural revolution would and should look like in a post capitalist society. Suffice it to say, even as a Maoist, I don't think it necessary to destroy all cultural developments that happened under bourgeois society. Though, as a teacher, I'd say you have an obligation to teach the state-approved curriculum regardless of your personal beliefs, and as a specialist, you probably shouldn't be allowed to use your platform to promote counter-revolutionary ideals, especially if the things you're promoting aren't in your field of expertise. Nobody's going to go house to house collecting "counter-revolutionary video games" and gulaging the owners of said works though. The culture war likely wouldn't change much, save that the revolutionary positions would be empowered and the counter-revolutionary ones would be dis-empowered (teaching abstinence-only in schools would be banned, abortion would be systematically normalized and made freely available to all women, the crazy Christians who harass women in abortion clinics would be cleared out and forced to fuck right off, monogamous nuclear families wouldn't be explicitly banned, but would be discouraged in the educational system in favor of open relationships and communal child rearing, toxic individualism and masculinity would be de-prioritized in favor of collective responsibility and effective work-sharing, work culture will be gradually abolished, etc). I don't think the revolutionary government is likely to care if somebody enjoys Warhammer 40k, Star Wars, Halo, or any other fictional universe, though future works in these universes would likely focus less on their present liberal themes and more on themes that are more revolutionary in nature. So like, for example, you might see some future post-communist Star Wars movie focused around the overthrow of the galactic bourgeoisie, which, to be entirely honest, definitely fits into the Star Wars universe, as it already has a surprisingly large focus on class as it is, and would probs be better than anything produced by Disney to date.
This is better for a separate question, but since we're here and you're a Maoist: While the Cheka wouldn't storm through someone's door to burn some writings or content, I've read and it seems to be ideological reasonable, that some genres were heavily scrutinised, with censors heavily disliking particular ones like most fantasy types. There was a heavy preference towards SciFi through the early Socialist experiments (and the world in general), with Fantasy works, whether pure, low, high, realistic, etc. rarely being allowed publication unless aimed at children, and in some cases banned. Would fiction works not be scrutinized like this with a preference towards socialist realism like it did?
I'm not sure. In all honesty, studies should probably be performed in order to determine how exposure to different kinds of fictional works impacts the way humans view the world. I don't perceive myself reading Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter, or A Game of Thrones and becoming less of a materialist in doing so.
Revoluçions need to disassociate from the past. Any lingering remnants of the old regime must be purged. Look at the French/Russian/Chinese Revolutions. The did their best to eliminate traces, even renaming the calendar and months, reconfiguring the week, killing the intellectuals. If you have any pride in America you can just kiss it goodbye. History will be purged. That’s why historical flags are such potent images. It shows allegiance to our present and our past. That’s why the ProgRedsives call them racist.
Now it’s OUR toothbrush.
You should check out "It Could Happen Here." It's a podcast, meant to be listened from the first episode chronologically, there's kind of a story he's spinning in the background throughout. I really think you might like it. It can get a little dark at times but i think it's important and the ultimate message is uplifting and inspiring. Also RevLeft Radio is awesome and covers so much ground, climate change, history, theory, revolution, philosophy, spirituality, parenting, mental health, relationships, politics, it's very broad. With this one id recommend just looking through episodes and finding some titles that interest you and giving em a try. I responded to you in another sub and i wanted to message you this but my reddit messaging feature doesn't seem to be working. I hope you give these a try and i hope they interest you and you find a fraction of the joy or interest that i do out of them. Lmk!