Revolution

reformism FAILS. The capitalists don't gradually give the workers control over the means of production.

no those are bad examples

the revolution was intended for advanced capitalist nations

the countries just listed are NOT.

Pannekoek wrote:

reformism FAILS. The capitalists don't gradually give the workers control over the means of production.

Unfounded farce

A few things you can thank socialist reformists for:
nationalized education - nationalized healthcare - nationalized transportation - nationalized energy supply - nationalized water supply - nationalized telecommunications.

inkus2000 wrote:

Pannekoek wrote:

reformism FAILS. The capitalists don't gradually give the workers control over the means of production.

Unfounded farce

A few things you can thank socialist reformists for:
nationalized education - nationalized healthcare - nationalized transportation - nationalized energy supply - nationalized water supply - nationalized telecommunications.

The mouth of large rivers are usually no more than a trickle. Its a start and we will keep moving faster towards the end goal

Quote :

The mouth of large rivers are usually no more than a trickle. Its a start and we will keep moving faster towards the end goal

[/quote]

You do know Plato didn't believe in democracy?, he thought society should be divided into classes and philosophers should rule.

inkus2000 wrote:

Quote :

The mouth of large rivers are usually no more than a trickle. Its a start and we will keep moving faster towards the end goal

You do know Plato didn't believe in democracy?, he thought society should be divided into classes and philosophers should rule.[/quote]

I am not a big Plato fan, Aristotle on the other hand was a genius, I also really enjoy Kant's perspective on the world. His theory of reversibility i really take to heart as should all communist and socialist of the world. It says If you were on the other end would you like it. So if the CEO's were on the other end in the factories we know they would hate it.

Quote :

A few things you can thank socialist reformists for:
nationalized education - nationalized healthcare - nationalized transportation - nationalized energy supply - nationalized water supply - nationalized telecommunications.

Yay, the means of production are held by the bourgeois state. Now I see why reforms give the means of production to the workers.

I think a slow reforming of a System from State Capitalist to State Socialism and then Communism is the best way - sure it isn't as fast and rapid as a Revolution but here's some simple reasons:

A) People will never agree to something forced onthem, its just natural.

B) People can get use to anything so if a slow messure of evolution is taken, the oposytion woun't be as strong as it would be with a day-to-day compleat swap.

C) Makeing a country suited even for socialism consumes time, in one case in reforming the infrastructur and economy, and also the mental aproach of people to it. Rapidly shifting from Capitalism to Socialism, only brings confusions and disarrey, the example being USSR.

D) Not Self-respecting Communist supports any form of Blood Bath.



On the side note - Obam is the best choice becous if he wins it'll break the streek of Right-winged presidents in the US history. Three Cheers for progressive Left - becouse progress is always progress.

Reform is basically asking the bourgeoisie to gradually cede their power until it's all gone, because reform is using the bourgeois state. Revolutionary Marxists want to abolish both the capitalist system and the bourgeois state, and create a new state utilizing soviet democracy.

It seems like the reformists think we will kill people just for fun or something. That is not the case. If someone shows no resistance we won't kill them, but if they do we may have to use force. We want as little violence as possible but know that the bourgeoisie will not just sit there and let the proletariat take power. They have to seize it for themselves, not by reform, but by a revolution smashing the bourgeois parliamentarian state and capitalism, replacing them with soviet democracy and socialism, respectively.

Do this.

kahnsguard wrote:

Do this.

that is actually on the flyer of my russian revolution class this thursday...

What is he doing?

Pannekoek wrote:

So may of us here support a revolution to overthrow capitalism, but how exactly will it happen? There is the plain old bloody revolution, there's the strike, the election, the "making cooperatives" method. I am trying to figure out what method is favored by those on this forum.

my revulution would involvolve hijacking the interwebs.

The interweb is a tool of the bourgeoisie so that won't work.

Pannekoek wrote:

The interweb is a tool of the bourgeoisie so that won't work.

oh yeah it was put up by a company, internet corps who have a permit for the internets cunstruction.

It was built by workers but it's owned by bourgeoisie, just like everything pretty much.

I don't believe in reformism for a few reasons:

1- People are suffering right now. The longer we take in toppling the state, the longer people will have to suffer.

2- The workers have never seized the means of production through a vote.

3- It is the capitalist system itself that directly opposes the workers, not the candidate in office. So what good does it do voting Obama over McCain? If anything, McCain would just speed up the process of revolution by further showing the alienation of workers under a capitalist system.

4- By thoroughly involving yourself in reform, you become an extension of the system you are using, capitalism. Let's not forget, the man does not make his situation, but the situation, rather, makes the man.

5- reforms will not cause the end of capitalism, but rather it is capitalism that will cause the end of reforms. And reform can only take us so far, since, by definition, reform must work within the confines of a given situation, and for it to tackle the capitalist beast, it would naturally be revolutionary by transcending reform.

6- Reform may have been useful in the past when capitalism was fresh, but now that it is wearing thin (by spending money on security, military, prisons, increased pay, etc.) there is much less in the way of abundance, so it is unlikely that capitalists, having become vultures and mere shadows of there former selves, will cede any of their remaining wealth if merely for the fact that they have already paid too much.

7- Reformism creates less and less as it is perpetuated. We stop with threats against the state, and begin accepting what they give us out of the goodness of their heart. So as we become more complacent and docile, they are less threatened. In reality, even the best way win reforms is to strive for revolution. When we do this, the capitalists start to fear that all of what they have will be taken, and they are more likely to throw us a bone to appease us.

so...NJNP...

how is that not agreeing with me?

I could not have said it better myself
lol

Pannekoek wrote:

It was built by workers but it's owned by bourgeoisie, just like everything pretty much.

yeah just like this forum is owned by big scary, bad companyes.

MarxistFreeman wrote:

so...NJNP...

how is that not agreeing with me?

I could not have said it better myself
lol

haha, ya. Who said i didn't agree with you when it comes to reformism? I just don't agree with a state transition (i'm goin through some hard-core self-fulfilling prophecy right now, haha. The more i find myself defending anarchism [since no one else seems to do it], the more i find myself leaning towards their theory on revolution).

Quote :

yeah just like this forum is owned by big scary, bad companyes.

Don't twist his words, cappie.

NoJustice.NoPeace wrote:

MarxistFreeman wrote:

so...NJNP...

how is that not agreeing with me?

I could not have said it better myself
lol

haha, ya. Who said i didn't agree with you when it comes to reformism? I just don't agree with a state transition (i'm goin through some hard-core self-fulfilling prophecy right now, haha. The more i find myself defending anarchism [since no one else seems to do it], the more i find myself leaning towards their theory on revolution).

Quote :

yeah just like this forum is owned by big scary, bad companyes.

Don't twist his words, cappie.

what is their theory

capitalist state-smashing of capitalist state-worker's state-whithering away of state

thats us^^^^

Capitalist state-smashing of capitalist state-end

anarchists^^^^

MarxistFreeman wrote:

capitalist state-smashing of capitalist state-worker's state-whithering away of state

thats us^^^^

Capitalist state-smashing of capitalist state-end

anarchists^^^^

gotcha

mononokifool wrote:

MarxistFreeman wrote:

capitalist state-smashing of capitalist state-worker's state-whithering away of state

thats us^^^^

Capitalist state-smashing of capitalist state-end

anarchists^^^^

gotcha

To be very, very curt, yes, that's what it is.

What if you're being not curt.