I have been saying they don’t think it is THE solution, and then I give the reasons why they think it is important. You seem to think they don’t see it as important though, or not THAT important, which they do, like other than organizing protest/aid, this is what they do. They put a lot of resources into this, you don’t spend so many resources on something that is a nice side benefit, and not particularly important.
The problem is that they don’t have specific plans beyond this. When talked about, or even when looking for things online, there is a lot of talk about how “the material conditions are not yet ready for revolution”, and other vague reasons behind not actually, really, truly, planning to execute a revolution. The other common response is that if they did that they would be destroyed like other radical groups. So, to those who see no other choice than revolution NOW, they are revolutionary in name only.
PSL isn’t a vanguard party yet, it needs to be accepted by the vast majority of the working class to do so. Electoralism helps that purpose, it isn’t expected to gain actual change. There don’t exist people that “see no choice than revolution NOW,” that’s a misconception. Rather than trying to plan an adventurist coup now, or try to win electorally, PSL uses electoralism to spread their platform and gain legitimacy so that when revolution happens, they will be the vanguard.
You seem to be under the misconception that they use electoralism as a strategy for change, which is wrong, and you also seem to think revolutionaries seek revolution now, which is wrong, and that therefore people on Hexbear/Lemmy.ml/Lemmygrad.ml must not like PSL, which is wrong again. PSL isn’t planning a coup, revolution requires mass support that doesn’t exist yet.
You seem to think I am discussing my own thoughts on the subject. We are discussing things I see other people do, remember? These are things I see people say, with frequency. I also told you exactly what I was told by the Chicago branch, which was not “change” it is because their experience is that if everything they say is immaterial, or not even heard, then they aren’t winning over the majority, so they do this.
I see people do this on the regular, so I don’t know what to tell you. You are telling me I am not experiencing what I am experiencing.
I’m in Hexbear, Grad, Lemmy.ml, etc quite frequently and I’ve never seen people act the way you’ve described. As for PSL, I’ve spoken to multiple branches, and they more affirm what I’m saying. I dunno, you’re seeing a fundamentally different experience than I am, and since you aren’t really giving examples all we can say is that we see different things.
Also, let me make something else more clear, I am pro-action in this direction. I am against people online who demand violence, but do nothing but call people shit-libs online, when something else is being discussed. It is the hypocrisy that bother me. My choices have made my life violent, and now I am older, and that has made my already shitty body worse. These people have never started a structure fire, let alone fired on human beings.
I don’t see people typically advocating for random adventurism, but revolution, which isn’t something you just do, or something you actively plan for, just organize as best you can for the time it comes.
The difference is how someone acts at home, vs how they act elsewhere, I never said I see this stuff on .ml, etc. I said I see people with those those home addresses doing it, yes it is different than hanging out in their own proverbial club house. In the thread I posted a screen cap of there are plenty of people arguing we are past the point of anything but violence, go ahead and ask them what violent things they are doing. They are keyboard warmongering, without any reason to believe they have done anything actually radical, and even reason to specifically doubt it. Bunch of people who have never thrown a molotov at police, so to speak, before demanding violence of others.
I think you are confusing, and/or blending, things I am saying, maybe. There are people calling for the violence part of revolution, and they tend to do so on posts that discuss, other, non-violent aspects of it. They can’t out-right say these things, as direct calls for violence will get you censored, but what they say has no other logical conclusion. Such as you can’t get what was taken by force, without force. Whether you call it adventurism, or revolution, matters not, as this is what the people I am seeing are claiming it to be. Whether they are correct, or not, is not the point here.
I am saying we need organization, and planning, first, however we are at the point, at least in the US, where I truly doubt peaceful revolution is possible. You need a plan when you are enacting revolution otherwise you either get nowhere, or you decapitate the state you are against, and leave a vacuum of power to fill, and descend into chaos. I hard disagree that you don’t actively plan for revolutionary action. Historically there has always been some level of planning, the level of planning tends to be a major determining factor on the cohesion of the end result.
My underlying point is that the people I see calling for “force to take back what was taken by force now”, or whatever euphemisms, or vagueries, they may be using to say “we need hot conflict to resolve this, and that means violence”, have never really dealt with any of the type of violence that goes into a society changing revolt. Often they will also blame people not “taking up arms”, so to speak, as the problem, while they, themselves, do not do this either. This is my problem with it.
You’re still conflating an adventurist coup with a revolution with mass support, the former fails every time while the latter takes more time and mass support. The latter is what people want to push, but they aren’t going to firebomb a supermarket or anything, it needs to be deeply permeated within the working class before it can happen.
I have been saying they don’t think it is THE solution, and then I give the reasons why they think it is important. You seem to think they don’t see it as important though, or not THAT important, which they do, like other than organizing protest/aid, this is what they do. They put a lot of resources into this, you don’t spend so many resources on something that is a nice side benefit, and not particularly important.
The problem is that they don’t have specific plans beyond this. When talked about, or even when looking for things online, there is a lot of talk about how “the material conditions are not yet ready for revolution”, and other vague reasons behind not actually, really, truly, planning to execute a revolution. The other common response is that if they did that they would be destroyed like other radical groups. So, to those who see no other choice than revolution NOW, they are revolutionary in name only.
PSL isn’t a vanguard party yet, it needs to be accepted by the vast majority of the working class to do so. Electoralism helps that purpose, it isn’t expected to gain actual change. There don’t exist people that “see no choice than revolution NOW,” that’s a misconception. Rather than trying to plan an adventurist coup now, or try to win electorally, PSL uses electoralism to spread their platform and gain legitimacy so that when revolution happens, they will be the vanguard.
You seem to be under the misconception that they use electoralism as a strategy for change, which is wrong, and you also seem to think revolutionaries seek revolution now, which is wrong, and that therefore people on Hexbear/Lemmy.ml/Lemmygrad.ml must not like PSL, which is wrong again. PSL isn’t planning a coup, revolution requires mass support that doesn’t exist yet.
You seem to think I am discussing my own thoughts on the subject. We are discussing things I see other people do, remember? These are things I see people say, with frequency. I also told you exactly what I was told by the Chicago branch, which was not “change” it is because their experience is that if everything they say is immaterial, or not even heard, then they aren’t winning over the majority, so they do this.
I see people do this on the regular, so I don’t know what to tell you. You are telling me I am not experiencing what I am experiencing.
I’m in Hexbear, Grad, Lemmy.ml, etc quite frequently and I’ve never seen people act the way you’ve described. As for PSL, I’ve spoken to multiple branches, and they more affirm what I’m saying. I dunno, you’re seeing a fundamentally different experience than I am, and since you aren’t really giving examples all we can say is that we see different things.
Also, let me make something else more clear, I am pro-action in this direction. I am against people online who demand violence, but do nothing but call people shit-libs online, when something else is being discussed. It is the hypocrisy that bother me. My choices have made my life violent, and now I am older, and that has made my already shitty body worse. These people have never started a structure fire, let alone fired on human beings.
I don’t see people typically advocating for random adventurism, but revolution, which isn’t something you just do, or something you actively plan for, just organize as best you can for the time it comes.
The difference is how someone acts at home, vs how they act elsewhere, I never said I see this stuff on .ml, etc. I said I see people with those those home addresses doing it, yes it is different than hanging out in their own proverbial club house. In the thread I posted a screen cap of there are plenty of people arguing we are past the point of anything but violence, go ahead and ask them what violent things they are doing. They are keyboard warmongering, without any reason to believe they have done anything actually radical, and even reason to specifically doubt it. Bunch of people who have never thrown a molotov at police, so to speak, before demanding violence of others.
I still think you’re confusing people saying revolution is necessary with saying we all need to commit adventurist terrorism now.
I think you are confusing, and/or blending, things I am saying, maybe. There are people calling for the violence part of revolution, and they tend to do so on posts that discuss, other, non-violent aspects of it. They can’t out-right say these things, as direct calls for violence will get you censored, but what they say has no other logical conclusion. Such as you can’t get what was taken by force, without force. Whether you call it adventurism, or revolution, matters not, as this is what the people I am seeing are claiming it to be. Whether they are correct, or not, is not the point here.
I am saying we need organization, and planning, first, however we are at the point, at least in the US, where I truly doubt peaceful revolution is possible. You need a plan when you are enacting revolution otherwise you either get nowhere, or you decapitate the state you are against, and leave a vacuum of power to fill, and descend into chaos. I hard disagree that you don’t actively plan for revolutionary action. Historically there has always been some level of planning, the level of planning tends to be a major determining factor on the cohesion of the end result.
My underlying point is that the people I see calling for “force to take back what was taken by force now”, or whatever euphemisms, or vagueries, they may be using to say “we need hot conflict to resolve this, and that means violence”, have never really dealt with any of the type of violence that goes into a society changing revolt. Often they will also blame people not “taking up arms”, so to speak, as the problem, while they, themselves, do not do this either. This is my problem with it.
You’re still conflating an adventurist coup with a revolution with mass support, the former fails every time while the latter takes more time and mass support. The latter is what people want to push, but they aren’t going to firebomb a supermarket or anything, it needs to be deeply permeated within the working class before it can happen.