Anonymous vintage_trampler 18h

Which is what exactly? What comes after this act? Nothing because there isn’t a functional left movement in America rn

3

Anonymous vintage_trampler 18h

Bro would call Lenin, Castro, Ho Chi Minh, and Mao all “party poopers” because they all said “you can’t start shooting until you have enough people on your side to actually win a fucking fight, dumbass” lmao Revolutionaries have to swim in the sea of the masses, and if the masses fear you more than they sympathize, that sea is frozen. You ain’t swimming in shit.

8

Anonymous cheese_of_the_world_unite 18h

They were all violent leftist so you probably condone them all as terrorists

5

Anonymous #3 18h

See Luigi Mangione

0

Anonymous #2 17h

What comes next? Reconstruction? Like duh

2

Anonymous vintage_trampler 17h

Nah those guys were successful revolutionaries who built the coalitions and in-roads with the population necessary for a revolution before they did the violent part of it. Because there’s steps to this shit. Anyone who’s studied any historical revolution knows there’s steps to that shit.

3

Anonymous cheese_of_the_world_unite 17h

Stalin Literally robbed banks there’s levels to this shit fam. 40 people fucking died during that.😭

5

Anonymous cheese_of_the_world_unite 17h

I don’t know why “random acts of violence won’t do it, you need to actually have organization” seems to be a controversial take here

3

Anonymous #3 17h

Chickens are ideal but you start first with eggs

3

Anonymous #4 17h

Yeah man Stalin robbed banks once he had an organization behind him that could hide him, and when the organization needed money. Dude wasn’t just out here robbing banks to rob banks. That shit was planned and organized.

3

Anonymous #3 17h

LARPers ain’t read the damn book

3

Anonymous vintage_trampler 17h

And no revolution has come out of random acts of violence without organization

2

Anonymous cheese_of_the_world_unite 17h

Acting as if these groups don’t have organization either is also crazy.

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 17h

The eggs in question are effective organization and political education among the population. I know a lot of the terminally online left finds it easier to imagine shooting the fascist than to imagine talking to someone in real life about politics, but yeah you kinda gotta talk to people before you can spark a revolution. Sorry to burst your Wolfenstein fantasy that one dude can take down an entire regime lmao

5

Anonymous #3 17h

See The Boston Massacre

4

Anonymous vintage_trampler 17h

Do you think the American revolution didn’t have organization? And when do you think the Boston massacre happened?

3

Anonymous cheese_of_the_world_unite 17h

What do people need to read for the revolution to magically begin then?

6

Anonymous #3 17h

Follow up question, who do you think did the Boston massacre

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 17h

The Boston Massacre was a completely disproportionate act of violence by the state against the masses, that was not a battle lmao that was a protest, in which the state’s response to it was disproportionate. That’s not a case for adventurism. Lexington and Concord came well after that, after people became more fed up with the British. This is not a case for adventurism.

3

Anonymous #3 17h

A RANDOM MOB LOL

0

Anonymous vintage_trampler 17h

Do you mean British soldiers shooting into a crowd?

2

Anonymous vintage_trampler 17h

The mob did not commit the massacre, the mob was who got massacred. Again, you haven’t read the book. Seemingly haven’t read any of them.

4

Anonymous #3 17h

The mob was the first be become violent

5

Anonymous cheese_of_the_world_unite 17h

The mob started the “violence”

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 17h

I mean sure if you wanna count snowballs and bullets as the same thing, I guess

0

Anonymous cheese_of_the_world_unite 17h

It literally was the run up to the revolution that formed this country. And it was unorganized

3

Anonymous cheese_of_the_world_unite 17h

Guevara wrote about the tactic of small, admittedly planed, attacks on occupation forces in order to inspire violent responses against the general population, thus helping promote the Revolution.

6

Anonymous #3 17h

They literally have. Many in fact have.

1

Anonymous #4 17h

What revolution has been random acts of violence and succeeded?

1

Anonymous #3 16h

Irish Civil War.

4

Anonymous #4 16h

To be fair all rebellions start with random acts of violence in most instances.

4

Anonymous #4 16h

So for this, we have to delineate “Revolution (Independence)” and “Social Revolution” Adventurism can work in a war of independence because in that situation there is a built in divide between the foreign state and the local population. In a social revolution, one where the people are overthrowing their very own government, it’s a lot harder and requires more groundwork before the fighting begins.

5

Anonymous cheese_of_the_world_unite 15h

The Royal Crown was the very own government of the colonists

1

Anonymous vintage_trampler 15h

Technically it would be more appropriate to call the American revolution a separatist movement, but still one that was very well organized from the start

1