babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
We both know class struggle can go on for hundreds of years, should we just grin and bare it? How long would be too long?
The middle class has already lost too much.
More or less, yes it means sucking up to the necessity of protracted political action with the explicit, non-reformist aim of transferring ruling-class political power to the worker-class, even if it means the political exclusion of the bourgeoisie and petit-bourgeoisie (i.e., more than just the Bolshevik scrapping of universal suffrage).
I think I've posted here before about scrapping judges and replacing them entirely with a jury system, about combining legislative and executive-administrative power, about random selection replacing elections of persons altogether, about sovereign socioeconomic governments directly representative of ordinary people and going beyond mere Economic Parliaments, about public officials having the same living standards as the median professional or other skilled worker, and about immediate recallability from multiple avenues (popular recall, party recall, institutional recall, etc.).
This in turn is complemented by struggles for waves after waves of pro-labour structural reforms: Die Linke's "left reform projects," shorter normal workweek without loss of pay or benefits, private-sector collective bargaining as free and universal legal services from government agencies, unconditional state aid for worker coops, and the structural reform crescendos being Hyman Minsky and Rudolf Meidner on non-frictional unemployment and worker and social savings rates, respectively.
Thanks for that pretty amazing post, ElizaQ, which I'm still recovering from. I obviously need to go out and get myself educated about the Caledonia struggle (and maybe a lot of others). It occurs to me that I was the one guilty of semantics in trying to force-fit things into preconceived categories. Wrong again...
"When is the time for violent revolution?": A loaded question, if ever I saw one.
Take a peek outside and youll see why it was asked.
And what would stop u from revolution? violent if necessary?
Because ad hoc organization as opposed to permanent organization doesn't work in the long term. 1968 in France was a joke.
I really have to wonder what the motives of the person starting this thread were. It's exactly the sort of thread that somebody working for the CIA or CSIS would start here just to make Rabble look bad.
Armed struggle couldn't possibly work. An uprising may well be needed, but it has to be some other way. The Bolshevik Revolution couldn't be repeated even if anyone actually wanted that. And should we really want that, given what it led to then?
We have to find the way to take power without giving up our humanity. Not out of any "kumbaya" bullshit, but because if we do give it up, we won't be able to reclaim it later.
Ya, the world is falling apart, our children have less of a future then we have, the rich are still making obscene wealth, for all the efforts of the left NOTHING has improved (gay and lesbian rights being an exception) and you have the nerve to play conspiracy theorist.
Sorry to burst your bubble, im no double agent, are u living in the real world?
How many lefties here are just clueless baby boomers? commited to a better world but overall unaware of whats going on outside their front door because their mortgage is paid, their cars are paid and they have a nice nest egg.
Only someone who is clueless of reality would think they need to jump to some conspiracy theory to explain why anyone would be so fed up with bullshit that they wonder what would be wrong with a violent revolt.
Anything is possible, the question remains, when is bad enough to allow for a violent revolt.
The reason I cant get any good straight answers is because anyone who thinks about it realizes there must be a point when it is acceptable and that point is hard to quantify, I would even go further and say that many here, like me, wonder if we havent already lost too much and apparently the left cant organize a fart properly so maybe some new tactics are needed? maybe?
I live in the same world YOU live in, buddy. I see all the things you see.
I also know that people who actually wanted to START an armed struggle for revolutionary change wouldn't announce it in a public Internet forum. They'd be off somewhere trying to actually get it going.
And they wouldn't say "violent revolt". Those terms are used by people who are PART of the power-structure to express their fears about an uprising from below.
You've tipped your hand.
And there's also the fact that you started a thread a few months ago entitled:
"When do we cut the heads off the rich & burn buildings?"Which is the kind of thing that CSIS/CIA/FBI types THINK leftists say.
Im not announcing shit *L* im wondering why the left, despite being right, cant fix anything these days.
Who is going to save the middle class? rob ford? *LOL* stephen harper? *LOL* come on man!
Im being honest and frank, when is violent revolt necessary? thats the question.
And ya, I did that other thread too, crafty me, I even used the same login, thats how tricky I am.
The right is trash, the left has the responsibility to solve things but I have to deal with turd burgers like yourself who are so dense you want to think theres a conspiracy.
The people I care about and any future kids I might have will have to live with the actions/inactions I do.
Your ok with doing nothing, your in good company, the left has done nothing for the past 30 years as things went to shit and apparently talking asking when is a good time to take control is beyond ur ability to handle, just tell me ur ok with right wingers running things and spare me the time it takes to post back to you.
P.S. I also posted that on enmasse.ca and got an interesting discussion going.
I think both sites have issues since an honest question appears difficult to even ask!
Theres lots of lefties that are tired of whats going on and at the very least I want to know why doing next to nothing is acceptable while our society crumbles.
- Removed by user -
We could also call the thread 'how to win friends and influence people', I guess.
The thing is, you're getting the cart way ahead of the horse here. Look around you - most Canadians are pretty well off - and most of them understand that they could be a whole lot worse off if they throw all the cards up in the air and see what happens. Tough times are not as good as easy times, but they are a lot better than living in Rwanda, for example. Having a higher debt load than ever before is not quite comparable to having armed gangs roaming the streets and killing at will. Most people understand this.
You shouldn't be screaming at people and name-calling because they don't want to get their guns and tag along behind you doing whatever half-witted thing you have in mind loosely called 'REVOLUTION!!!!!' - most people understand that whatever that would entail would very quickly make this country a lot worse, not a lot, not even a bit, better. And if people with your attitude are planning to be our new "leaders", well, you're going to have trouble raising enough support to pay for your own "Let's have a revolution!' website, let alone raise a revolutionary army. Much as I dislike our current leaders, at least they still more or less follow the laws we have in Canada, which you apparently don't feel obliged to do. And given your predeliction to get out the guns, I for one am pretty sure I don't want you and your buds running things here. (somewhat ironcially, I suppose, I suspect a lot more Canadians would be thinking about revolution if people with your attitude were running things here ...)
You really need to calm down - you should be trying to figure out ways to talk to Canadians, to let them know that things are going downhill, and why you think they are going downhill, and what an engaged, informed citizenry might do to take back our country. It might be a bit less glamorous, but it would be at least realistic. And if most Canadians don't agree with you - well, isn't that kind of what Democracy is all about? I am pretty unhappy myself about the apparent inability of most people to see what is going on here - but I recognize that most Cdns are reasonably intelligent, and certainly able to make decisions for themselves - and if they want to listen to lies and turn the country over to the neocons, as they apparently do - then I guess they're going to do that.
If you're really gungho about getting out the guns, there's places in the world that kind of thing is needed much more than here. Of course, you're going to have some pretty bad dudes with their own guns looking back at you, unlike here. Burma, maybe, or Mexico, or Columbia, various African countries - they all need some good revolutionary leaders, willing to get out the guns and do some serious bad-guy killing. Makes you think a bit, since in such places the bad guys are pretty good at taking care of wannabe revolutionaries - but hey, it would be some good practice. You might even learn some stuff.
Btw, without sounding annoyed I just want to point out that invoking conspiracy theorys when you dont like someones question is about as pointless/dumb as just calling someone hitler.
Its not designed to answer anything or prove anything, its designed solely to dismiss someone.
Dismiss my questions at your own peril, theres lots of people out there wondering the same thing, if u lack the ability to come up with an intelligent answer then u would be better off not posting, if you have a good answer I wish ud tell me, even tell me why u think theres never a good reason to (violently or not) fight back.
How do you judge that most Canadians are well off?
Would we have to be living on the streets before that was "too far"?
Wages are stagnant, benefits are all but gone, pensions are few and small, the blood of thousands of afghanis are on Canadian hands (for no good reason), we work too long and dont get enough free time, our rights are chipped away and disappearing, sure we can say were better then our sickening neighbours to the south, but why dont we just go ahead and compare ourselves to some facist third world then?
I wish you and others would READ what I said and not answer what u think I said.
I want to know what you think is the breaking point, of course I tend to think we have seen too much bullshit to take anymore, but I want to see why this is acceptable to the rest of us. Most of you fail in simply understanding the question, not to mention most of u seem to struggle to come close to an intelliget answer, I apologize if I come off as rough but dammit some people are dense and its annoying to have to repeat myself because some people assume I mean something other than what I asked.
FYI i never once said gun, never once and you called it a predeliction *LOL*
If I had to distill this paragraph down you basically say your ok with leaders as long as they follow the rules, Harper doesnt follow the rules, so then what? or maybe u mean only mostly follow the rules, ok, to what point then? where is the breaking point?
Am I getting through to you?
*LOL* i AM a Canadian, im just not "OK" with how screwed things are.
This is insane! I am a guy standing in a house thats burning to the ground, minutes away from killing us all and im running around trying to tell u to get out of the house and you turn to me and say "woah woah woah, wheres the fire man?" *LMAO*
AAAAARRRRGGGHHHH !!!!!
Realistic like facism?
If everyone agreed that blacks should be slaves would that make it any more correct?
Democracy is one thing, ethics are another.
Fox news in the states has the sheeple thinking that right wingers will bring back the middle class, they are wrong and itll be the rest of us that suffer because ppl are stupid, does that seem right?
The black man should have told his son "well were slaves because most americans want us to be slaves and we are a democracy so ..."
Yes yes, tell me that slavery was abolished but thepoint stands, just because the masses want it doesnt mean its correct or ethical.
If its unethical than we should fight it!
So why try to do anything?
Ok, u cast ur lot with the "grin and bare it" crowd, remember that when u see those u care about suffering.
*sigh* ...
What does what any other country needs have to do with what Canada needs?
and for the last _ _ _ _ _ _ _ time ...
1. Im not looking to start a revolution
2. Im not a revolutionary, though putting up with you makes me see why leadership is so necessary sometimes.
3. I hate guns and have never brought them into the conversation
"I hate guns and have never brought them into the conversation"
Uh...dude...once you start talking about "violent revolution", guns pretty much ARE part of the conversation. You're not gonna do it with creme pies.
OH, and would you PLEASE let go of the idea that those who might question the idea of violence aren't just as outraged by the injustices of life as you are?
1) You don't have to kill people to be a revolutionary.
2) Most violent people AREN'T actually revolutionaries.
????? You have me puzzled - what exactly was your point then in opening this thread? If you really don't want to start a revolution, what is the point in asking when it's time to start one? Can you understand at all where people might have misunderstood you? You certainly did not make this clear in your OP - oh, by the way, just asking you know, I certainly don't want no revoultion haha!
Anyway - I think you have your answer - seems to be pretty much the consensus that right now is not it, nor the near future.
If you want to know why I think Cdns have it pretty good right now, then obviously your education is pretty shallow - not an unusual trait in people advocating violence. Read some history, and some current events. In terms of socieities of the last 2000 or 10000 years, we're pretty close to the top in terms of the general wellbeing of our citizens, and it would not be a bright idea to throw that all away because we are in some hard times. Check out any human development or wellbeing scale, and Canada is always near the top. You may or may not have noticed, we are still better off than most countries - which is not because of our great leadership, I am not saying that, but because our ancestors built a very good country which has been stolen from us - and yes, our job is to take the country back and get the usurpers out of our government, but most of us do not see violent revolution as the means of doing that. At least yet. Yes, things are currently going downhill, and I am very well aware of that and have been fighting it much longer, I expect, than you (if you are at all open-minded and might be able to learn a bit, you could have a read of this if you have not seen it already What Happened? http://www.rudemacedon.ca/what-happened.html to see where I am ) - but building a democracy takes a long, long time, and destroying it can be done very quickly. A violent revolution is a very uncertain thing, but one thing it would be is very, very destructive - and who knows how many decades we would be set back, for no guarantee at all of something better (as I said, with your attitude towards those who disagree with you, I wouldn't want you or those you would find agreeable anywhere near any government I was subject to .. you should probably consider that if you do get around to actually advocating the revolution)
- and as with ken and no doubt others who have nothing better to do than follow this I find myself again puzzled - perhaps if this carries on, the conversation might be informed by learning how is it you see a violent revolution happening without guns?
Gustafsen Lake and before that the struggles around Lil'wat were also about the reassertion of Indigenous sovereignty. What makes these struggles especially difficult is the collaborating class of Canada imposed delegated administration - also fights against this reassertion since it endangers their privilege. The traditional sovereigntists are thus doubly beleagured.
In these cases, it must also be remembered that as a settled and binding matter of international and constitutional law, Canada is supposedly bound to respect the integrity of Indigenous sovereign traditional leadership systems on their lands, until and only if a treaty of informed consent between Canada and that sovereign indigenous nation occurs. What actually happened, is that the lands were invaded, occupied and despoiled, foreign puppet systems were imposed, and then a negotiation process began to elevate these imposed, administrative units, into 'First Nation Governments'.
The present negotiations between Canada and Indigenous peoples are largely a continuation of this same process - There is actually quite a bit of good material buried in the multiple threads and discussions of this. But the germane point is that, not only indeed, are there struggles where nations are seeking the return of full sovereign control and independence outside the 'infested blanket' of Canadian state control, but that there is a huge body of very solid law that commits Canada and the 'maritime Countries of Europe' to honour and respect those sovereignties. The two row wampum is, I believe one example of the legal and constitutional principles enshrined.
Unfortunately, the usurpation process, comes because in the realpolitic world, you only truly have jurisidiction if you can enforce it.
It must be Sunday morning.
Where to start.
Mod Hat On.
These are just two examples of quotes in which you insult the left in general, and babblers specifically. While I agree with your point about achieving class security and losing interest in political and activist struggles, this isn't the way to frame it. And personal attacks are not allowed.
When I first read the OP I saw, and ignored, your clear blaming of the left for not fixing the various ills brought about by the capitalists and their friends in big government (Libs and Cons, Repubs and Dems).
But this is clearly a sticking point for you.
A reminder that those who have structural power (Hint, that's not the organized left or even the unorganized left, and in the North American context, HAS NEVER BEEN) are the ones in positions to effect social change. And hey, look! They don't do it! Hence my comment above about the ballot box. That's not where I see change happening, or more specifically, compelling the power-makers to change. Unless someone revolutionary is voted in to power, and I just don't see that happening either.
And you just leap-frogged over the reality, which is armed struggle that is not accessible to white men that's going on in Canada RIGHT NOW. It's being fought for some things that, perhaps, you don't have any interest in, Argh, but nonetheless, there it is. To learn from, hell, to join, they're always looking for allies.
But no, it has to be on your terms, so you just go back to the white guys who are engaging you at your level. Okay. That's your prerogative. But it reveals what kind of actual discussion you want to have.
And.
If you continue to insult babblers and "the left" you will be banned.
....
siamdave, we've already had a lovely exchange already, but with my mod hat on I would ask you to reflect on:
Where to start?
Um, "our" ancestors? Who do you think reads babble? WASPs only? Come on! "built this country"? Really? Stole, yes. Built after stealing, pillaging and destroying, yes. You're making a lot of assumptions, siamdave.
Aside from that, your quote reads like the Tea Party's manifesto. And people wonder why folks of colour don't join the "organized" left in Canada.
- obviously you have even less idea of who I am or what I think than you accuse me of having of you. I have explained myself, my beliefs, my thoughts, how I got where I am, etc in great detail elsewhere (i.e. Green Island http://www.rudemacedon.ca/greenisland.html , What Happened? http://www.rudemacedon.ca/what-happened.html ) - is there anywhere your beliefs and understandings etc are written that a curious one could peruse? (you personally, not the writings of others ...)
I may or may not address the rest of what you say. it would take some time, but I'm not at all sure there would be any point - obviously your mind is made up, and facts aren't of any great importance. Tell me first, Maysie, if I can talk, or if I start saying stuff you don't want to hear you're going to pull on the mod hat and ban me for incorrect thought or something? Your positiion is somewhat less unassailable than you seem to think...
I love it when someone starts threatening to shun :-)
no middle ground huh between spitting on the sidewalk, or or ... jaywalking! and violent revolution?
siamdave, all we have on babble are our words. Bios and written works for credibility purposes shouldn't be necessary. Your first link doesn't work. I read your second link.
If I made assumptions about the piece I quoted from you, then I apologize. But when folks throw words like "our" around in an indiscriminate fashion, it is sloppy, to say the least, especially when right wing white supremacist tropes like "our ancestors built this country" are invoked.
That phrase eliminates the existence of ALL Aboriginal peoples. Just like that. Magic. That phrase evokes the vast empty land of Canada, discovered as pristine, virginal, empty of people and civilization and ripe for settlement by the benevolent explorers from France and England. Then settlers came and worked hard and built this country, and made Canada what it is today. You know, what those of us brought up in Canadian elementary school were taught. You know, lies.
All lies.
My ancestors did not build this country. My ancestors benefitted from previous genocide and colonization of Aboriginal people, of which I'm not one. If you mean your ancestors, then say your ancestors.
Nonetheless, this entire piece is thread drift.
Anyone who wishes to see my uncensored thoughts on all manner of issues can check out my blog, which is linked on my babble user page.
Why are your thoughts (self-)censored here?
I've been reading this thread and there's been alot of talk about revolution through violence.
What I haven't read so far is the nature of this violent upheaval.
What are we talking about?
Bombing mail boxes or attacking the general public?...I don't think I'd be onboard with that.
Or are we talking about fire bombing police stations,banks,Quebecor or 24 Sussex Drive?
Would the targets be political figures?
Are we talking about old fashioned assassinations?
I'm all for a revolt but I'd like to know if this revolt would be a bloody coup,an organized mass vote against the status quo (unlikely unfortunately) or just an exercise of civil disobedience and anarchy.
alan, I'm for door #3. As is my post #15.
You're still a babbler because of my censored thoughts and actions.