Message from @Blebleh
Discord ID: 315998049157644289
there can be protestors but the people when they don't know the problems could ignore it
and let them pass
The majority is incorruptible?
the people has to decide the fate
they're not the ones who can be corrupted
If an authority works against the interests of the collective, objectively, then there may be grounds for new revolution, because they have become the new bourgeoisie.
It is inevitable.
people don't notice it when they don't know about it
this is happening in every country now
and I don't see how the USSR prevented this; a few people may realize it
What are you talking about? Don't you agree that socialism is inevitable?
yes but it needs class consciousness
and organization
even more, we need to be careful when we have a capitalist bloc that is our enemy
So how is it going to happen do you think? There are going to be revolutionary forces. Which is also why there should be a Vanguard.
the platform in combination with the anarchist unions have to improve the consciousness of the people and act
When a socialist authority gets corrupt, it becomes bourgeoisie. And a new dialectic begins.
we could add a party too, but as an extension
they don't have to become the bourgeoisie to be corrupt
@Blebleh What have anarchists unions achieved? They are hamstrung by their superstitious notions of 'consensus' and 'democracy'.
they've achieved 8 labour hours in Spain
with a general strike
the IWW while not pure anarchist, the organization I think it's and it's big
this is all to improve conditions for the worker and also get a consciousness for the revolution
and as I said, in the USSR before the party, there were councils
@Blebleh A dictatorship of the proletariat that betrays the interests of the collective is a contradiction. Either the Party is objectively proletariat or they are revisionist traitors. Class consciousness will win in the end.
it looked more like an anarchist federation
a prole can be traitor to his class
@Blebleh In there beginning there were councils, but this was abandoned because it was childish and ineffectual for revolutionary purposes.
what lenin says
Lenin was wrong?
probably in this
A prole who is a traitor is not a prole, but an agent of the bourgeoisie.
@Blebleh Councils are limited to reformism. Revolution is exclusively the business of the Vanguard.
a prole can be an agent of the bourgeoisie, declasé
we can set up theoretical unity in the platform agreeing on revolutionary themes
no reformism allowed
but we have to attract the people there, revolution is done by the masses not by a few
Sure, you can talk about it. It seems all they do. This is a great inefficiency. The masses cannot, by definition, lead themselves.
lenin wasn't a blanquist doing a coup d'etat