I imagined States like China or even relative democracies like the US are technologically advanced enough to stop diminish revolutionary action along with having a clear technological advantage when it comes to actual combat

In 1848 or 1917 the technology of the state militarily was very similar to the revolutionaries be it horses, rifles, cannons, etc. Now States have clear air superiority, mobile armor, along with huge informational advantages like drones and the like.

Read 4th generational warfare and war of the flea tbh

Both these go into this

You cant just fight the government in open combat anymore, one would have to resort to guerilla tactics and the like.

Has that actually won a nation before? This been a long-standing gorilla campaigns like the naxalites or farc but is that actually ever going to be a proletarian Revolution that seizes the state?

I feel it has the ability to sap the will of a imperial invader and eventually cause their withdrawal but within a revolution/civil war will that work?

I'm a person that Advocates the proletariat be armed and trained. I also go shooting with other leftists but I feel anything that might happen is so far off and the odds are so not in our favor it seems a bit silly talking about it at times.

@♡♡♡ probably a smart idea would be to just encircle a building in which the opposition's generals and leaders reside in, and take them all out, and next day when there's noone to lead the country, your party should say that you're the best fit for a leader

@quiscalus are you pro or anti democracy?

I believe in democracy personally but I think it should be done by workers alone without the influence of capitalists or capitalism

me personally, i'd remove any form of democracy from my country, to focus people on rebuilding their country and improving it, rather than make them fight one another. its smarter to focus people on a common goal

sounds good?

I guess how do you have a state that is controlled by the proletariat while being able to preserve civil liberties along with defending itself from hostile States and forces?

hmm

As much as many people would consider me a Tankie apologist I think that the Bolsheviks monopolizing control of state power post overthrow of the provisional government really led to the state being representative of the Bolsheviks interest as compared to all the workers

mhm

but you should consider one thing

those bolsheviks

they aren't russian at all

in fact they hated russians

to the bone

My big issue with the revolution of 1917 is that instead of workers having control of production and the state you have bureaucrats replacing the bosses

i see

I feel the main issue that I care about is the material conditions of individuals in Society And how capitalism is the engine engine of political and economic inequality. When you smash the class divisions you create a more democratic and Equitable Society in my perspective.

you know, if you give equal payment to literally everyone in a country, that wont make people happy, in fact that'll make some of them angry.

My big fear is that even though economic inequality will increase in time the forces of welfare capitalism will do their jobs well enough so that the average person isn't too deprived where revolutions doesn't seem like an atrractive option

I don't think everybody will be paid the same but I think everybody will get to have a say in the state and the places they work

when you give equal payment to everyone, you don't take into consideration that a janitor would get same payment as a banker, and that would just add more fuel to the fire. basically both of their efficency for work would be decreased because the janitor would realise he gets money for fuck all, while the banker would be pissed off because workers like janitors don't have to work in order to earn alot of money.

I definitely agree that people shouldn't be paid the same but I do think everybody should not be deprived of their basic necessities and that the state should nationalize the huge part of production especially anything that is considered a basic need aka natural resources, housing, education, food, healthcare, etc.

eh, in my opinion, the people who are the greatest threat to the goverment and our people should have their rights almost completely restricted. you know, if a certain group of people think that the people who don't follow them are animals and that they consider themselves superior to those ''animals'' and will do anything in their power to destroy the ''animals'' and degrade them and their country.

Well I think that interests of the state in the interests of the people can be quite different at times. Also I think political revolution is both viable and necessary for a better Society at times if you look at the u.s. revolution I think it was justified along with things like the Haitian revolution.

btw you should know that the people i want to restrict the rights of actually exist in this world

Also if you're to the right I really don't mind I have a decent friend in real life that is a proud boy and an ancap

kk

All who you think is a real Danger? I'm a leftist but but I support giving equal rights to people on the right. Just because people say things I don't agree with doesn't mean they should lose their job or housing.

Brb gotta get something done at work. Will be back I about 15 And want to chat more.

well

many right wingers lose their jobs just because of their beliefs

Okay I'm back now

I just think it's kind of not a great to have people lose things that are basic necessities like housing and work for having the wrong beliefs, I'm not very much a authoritarian wag my finge thought police type of individual