If the bourgeoisie turn to violence and terror during crises, how is that different from revolutionaries removing the bourgeoisie from power? I used to identify as an American Democrat but I’m super frustrated with their insistence on useless, vapid displays of “resistance”.
The difference is that violence from the bourgeoisie is directed against the vast majority of society to keep their parasitic profits, while revolutionary violence deposes this system and liberates the working classes.
This reminds me of a heuristic I heard about once, about “punching up” and “punching down”. I heard about it used in a stand-up comedy context but it seems to make sense in a lit of other places as well. Punching down almost always seems unjust, punching up almost always seems just.
Well, as someone who hasn’t Read Theory, the last line in the meme seems to disdain use of violence in a very general way. It was just confusing, but I see now that it’s just not well worded
If you want to be technical about it then yes it’s violence. But someone tried to kill someone and they fought back in self defence, it would be weird to label them as being violent right? It’s not like the person wanted violence, they would rather they weren’t attacked in the first place.
That makes sense. The use of violence here is to control the workers and the rest of society. It gets everyone back in line during a crisis reminding people that they have the power, not only to exploit them, but to also kill, imprison, and immiserate. Get in line and you’ll be better off. Work for us help get people in line and you’ll be better off than them.
If the bourgeoisie turn to violence and terror during crises, how is that different from revolutionaries removing the bourgeoisie from power? I used to identify as an American Democrat but I’m super frustrated with their insistence on useless, vapid displays of “resistance”.
The difference is that violence from the bourgeoisie is directed against the vast majority of society to keep their parasitic profits, while revolutionary violence deposes this system and liberates the working classes.
This reminds me of a heuristic I heard about once, about “punching up” and “punching down”. I heard about it used in a stand-up comedy context but it seems to make sense in a lit of other places as well. Punching down almost always seems unjust, punching up almost always seems just.
Pretty much, it’s a good rule of thumb.
How is the slave owner using a slave driver to whip slaves different from the slaves organizing and killing the slavers?
Well, as someone who hasn’t Read Theory, the last line in the meme seems to disdain use of violence in a very general way. It was just confusing, but I see now that it’s just not well worded
I made an introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list if you want a place to start, FYI
Yeah I saw that in your bio. Thanks for building that 😊 Life’s been stressful lately but it’s on my nightstand
Thanks so much!
If you want to be technical about it then yes it’s violence. But someone tried to kill someone and they fought back in self defence, it would be weird to label them as being violent right? It’s not like the person wanted violence, they would rather they weren’t attacked in the first place.
That makes sense. The use of violence here is to control the workers and the rest of society. It gets everyone back in line during a crisis reminding people that they have the power, not only to exploit them, but to also kill, imprison, and immiserate. Get in line and you’ll be better off. Work for us help get people in line and you’ll be better off than them.
How was fighting against the Nazis different from being the Nazis?