I think that the definition of a private army means that those with the most private goods stand to benefit the most from an environment that uses martial force.

yes, however, that does not always have to be the (ruling) class

which is why i didn't give a decisive answer

It generally varies based on state

You can't draw a solid conclusion that covers all states

Hey.

@TordTheTordis hej

yes, that's certainly true

however you also cannot always state from the get-go that a martial response is enacted on behalf of whichever ruling class governs

@Deleted User Is it possible to have dominant individuals with the most private goods, but who are not also the ruling class? It seems like a contradiction.

oh definitely

it doesn't have to be abstract or physical

just like the autumn harvest revolution

they certainly weren't the ruling class

but they were definitely dominant

the strong laborer who makes a fiery speech to his fellow serfs can be dominant in the same way that others could be

That's a very good point. Ideas can be more powerful than status if the conditions are ripe enough.

i think it is wrong to automatically assume any ruling class is responsible

this could potentially do your own movement harm, or discredit a genuine movement, simply by making the assumption

Can a rich man start a revolution for the poor, and a poor man start a revolution for the rich?

Well Zhou enlai came from the rich in Manchuria and helped Mao

that depends

or well, it doesn't depend

but you should clarify

is this "revolution" intended, or is it a byproduct of something else?

is a rich man specifically doing it to better the lives of the poor, and vice versa?

Yes, I am talking about potentiality. Is it ever possible for someone to make a speech to inspire against his personal, material interests, regardless of intent?

yes, but the motive could just as easily be unrelated

To tie this up then, often the ruling class or dominant individuals will be responcible for using armies in their own interests, but it is not always the case. It is also possible they can do the opposite.

mhm

If this is truly tied up I would like to bring up unifying global languages and my design plan for how we could try to do it

why would you do that?

It interests me as I know alot about linguistics

One last thing before you move on too far, to return to the example of terrorism and the psychological obsession in the West. Is this a ruling class ideology or do the masses also use it for their benefit?

well, you're excluding those who, in the minority of a population, through whatever means, reach dominance and can acheive the same thing

without being among the ruling class

an example could be a foreign coup

or a bunch of fringe radicals who somehow get the government to bend knee

Oh, I forgot that ruling class and dominance are different things.