Repeat Revolution

[Section 8]

I was thinking, but I'm not sure that in order to evolve into a communist society, then we will have to first go through a series of revolutions.

1) Democratic Socialism
2) Socialism
3) Partial Communism
4) Communism

Just a thought.

[Impenitent]

no, there will always be revolution but not in the way you hope, life itself is a struggle to survive... people are always greedy... there will always be the haves and the have-nots... that is life...

[castille]

5) Stalinist dictatorship.


Sorry, but revolution is the fastest way for an opportunistic powermonger to gain power. If you don't believe that, just ask Trotsky.


The ONLY way to prevent another Hitler wannabe from becoming dictator is to retain the status quo, but improve it gradually.


I kind of find it funny how Westerners always want quick change. If it doesn't work, blow it up and try to do it again (usually they end up doing it again poorly).


There isn't an English word for this, but the Japanese have a concept known as "kaizen". Basically means improving slowly and gradually, without having to destroy anything....

[Section 8]

I also have a name for it. Not getting anything done. I chose repeat revolution, because each step is a gradual change in order to help society through the culture shock.

[castille]

Your impatience has killed 100 million people in history. History has shown such revolutionary impatience is responsible for the rise of Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Castro, Franco, and countless other dictators.

For many youths of today, such impatience is fun. For example, if you are frustrated with homework, you burn all your homework and start again. Or if you're frustrated with life, you take drugs (its a revolution, right?).



Impatient people say "It won't work, lets BLOW IT UP and do it all over again!". This leads to wars, famine, and of course, 100 million deaths. How many people did impatient Stalin kill with his Revolution? How many people were brutally murdered and raped by the Russian Communists? In fact the Revolutionary Russians went as far as stripping the skin off the hands of former Imperial soldiers, in their frenzy of "Communist Revolution".


We can't prevent emotions from boiling. Mr Hobo Who Refuses To Work might torture his employer, rape a capitalist family, and loot all the stores while in his revolutionary rage.


Revolution is great if you want to kill people - otherwise it isn't the best way to do change.

[G. Adams]

oh i know, revolution has brought all those evil things, like democracy, liberalism and the end of the ancien regimes. i weep every morning for louis the 16. how many more clocks we would had have if the revolution never occurred.

[castille]

After the "Revolution" France was still an Imperialist power. They never let go of their colonies, and certainly democracy was reserved only for French people.

After the "Revolution" Russia was still an Imperialist power. In fact Stalin killed more people than any Czar did.

After the "Revolution", well China did take over Tibet, then killed 30 million people when Mao did his "Great Leap Forward" (realistically, it was more like "Great Leap Back!").

After the "Revolution", well Castro is still The Boss. Like Bapista (sp), but with different names. And instead of using American weapons to shoot his people, he used Soviet weapons.

After Japan's "Revolution" (Meiji era), they launched an aggressive war and killed millions of people.

After Germany's Revolution....well Hitler can testify.



Revolution doesn't achieve much....does it?

[G. Adams]

Ah no, your right. The English Civil War which ended brought liberalism and democracy to Britain was a terrible thing. And then even worse, those liberal ideas spread to the colonies in America! Oh no! Those evil revolutionaries killed a few people and began the closest thing to a real democracy since Athens.

And the French Revolution? Oh no! Serfdom was over? Terrible terrible.

[Bayou]

Hehe, he neglects to mention that the October revolution was not the result of the massive deaths in the Soviet Union, but the result of stalins POLICIES once he gained control 15 years later.
Had Trotsky ascended into power, history as we know it would be very different from 1920's on.
Mao would not have been the sole Socialist party in china, The left in Germany would have had Soviet support in defeating the Facists BEFORE they could turn germany into a military death machine.
The key is to evolve Democracy to the point wher it equals a revolution without resulting in violence.
Which is all that humble communist/anarchist wants anyways.
Thought of the day:
Is Anarchy Communism without a goal?
Discuss.