NationStates Jolt Archive

Just a question, which I've been thinking on:

When the French attempted to hold their Revolution and King Louis XVI called on his troops to go into Paris, they realized they had a rather large problem: the National Guard had no guns. (Of course, to solve this, they stormed the Bastille.)

So, a thought: What is the stance of Socialists/communists and the ownership of firearms, given that, at least in Marxist communism, it relies on the Proletariat overthrowing the upperclasses in a violent revolution, which, of course, requires guns. Your thoughts?

There will be one, massive gun controlled by the People. It will be fifty feet high and three hundred feet long.


~Alan Smithee
Director of Picture of Priority~

Revolutions don't have to be bloody, and they are not decided by weapons. So, no, the prospect of a necessary revolution does not justify free distribution to guns to all and everybody.

We communists do not use guns, we have a hammer in one hand and a sickel in the other, and we cut down the capitalist dogs....

In most significant communist revolutions, the firepower was provided by the military. Arming the general public was not necessary, its role was to support the cause and provide cover.

There will be one, massive gun controlled by the People. It will be fifty feet high and three hundred feet long.
Like the galaxy gun? :D

Like the galaxy gun? :D
Except made in China.


~Alan Smithee
Director of Woman Wanted~

Except made in China.
So it will break right when you need it most?

So it will break right when you need it most?

Yup. And then you'll have to pay an enormous sum to a German gun manufacturer to fix it and make sure that it works again the next time you need it. Only it still won't work, then.

Revolutions don't have to be bloody, and they are not decided by weapons. So, no, the prospect of a necessary revolution does not justify free distribution to guns to all and everybody.

With only one exception that I can think of, all revolutions have been bloody.

With only one exception that I can think of, all revolutions have been bloody.

I can think of at least two straight away...

commie but a reformist rather than revolutionist... no guns thanks cos the proletariat won't be doing any violent revolts today! just a waste of time...

I can think of at least two straight away...

Which two are those? The only one I can think of is the Meiji Restoration.

Which two are those? The only one I can think of is the Meiji Restoration.

Add to that the German reunification, and most of the other former communist countries like Hungary, Poland, Chezcoslovakia turning away from communism and eventually splitting into the Chezc Republic and Slovakia...

To be honest I don't see it as a major issue as we're looking to get the army/weapons manufacturers on side in the long run to provide support for the revolution. However, in the meanwhile I wouldn't mind guns going to the proleteriate as we all know the bourgeoisie will be armed to the teeth when their time comes.

Not to say this stance is definate. I've actually been pondering this question for the past few days. Can you see inside my head?

Add to that the German reunification, and most of the other former communist countries like Hungary, Poland, Chezcoslovakia turning away from communism and eventually splitting into the Chezc Republic and Slovakia...

I meant "Communist" revolutions. None of those were really revolutions in that sense... of course, nor was the Meiji Restoration.... So. Right. I like cookies. Don't you?

I meant "Communist" revolutions. None of those were really revolutions in that sense... of course, nor was the Meiji Restoration.... So. Right. I like cookies. Don't you?

Seeing as they were revolutions of the people against the establishment, they might even qualify... in a broader sense.
Sure, cookies are great :D

Yup. And then you'll have to pay an enormous sum to a German gun manufacturer to fix it and make sure that it works again the next time you need it. Only it still won't work, then.
Nope, the Germans will make sure it works.

Just a question, which I've been thinking on:

When the French attempted to hold their Revolution and King Louis XVI called on his troops to go into Paris, they realized they had a rather large problem: the National Guard had no guns. (Of course, to solve this, they stormed the Bastille.)

So, a thought: What is the stance of Socialists/communists and the ownership of firearms, given that, at least in Marxist communism, it relies on the Proletariat overthrowing the upperclasses in a violent revolution, which, of course, requires guns. Your thoughts?

I suppose I coould be describe as a commie, or a socialist. But the whole question is moot. Arming the populace if irrelevent, revolutions generally succeed or fail depending which side the army positions itself on.

Nope, the Germans will make sure it works.

Which explains the top notch job H&K did with the L85A1... considering that most British troops in Iraq refuse to use them.

I suppose I coould be describe as a commie, or a socialist. But the whole question is moot. Arming the populace if irrelevent, revolutions generally succeed or fail depending which side the army positions itself on.

though if the army splits on the issue, having access to weapons certainly helps (see, for example, the spanish civil war)

The jury is out on that one. I prefer non-violence, but those in power don't. If the workers ever attempted to establish a socialist society, it's more than likely that they would be squashed through force of arms...so they may be a necessary evil.

Lenin, who was a communist (as "reformists" are not), said that THE fundamental question of any revolution was, "Has the oppressed class arms?" He also indicated that it is absolutely necessary in the course of a workers' revolution to dismantle the standing army that characterizes a capitalist state and replace it with the armed citizenry. This is why the Bolsheviks distributed arms to the population at large after taking power, as did the governments of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam from the 1950s through the 1970s, the government of Cuba from 1959 to the present day, and assorted other communist or pro-communist governments in Algeria, Nicaragua, Grenada, etc.--and why communists from Marx's time to our own have consistently opposed gun control.

The refusal of Allende's government to distribute arms to the populace was one of Castro's major points of criticism.

Commie/Gun

As people've already pointed out, the psuedo-capitalists already are armed, and wont give up without a fully armed fight.

With only one exception that I can think of, all revolutions have been bloody.

Denmark getting it's parliament.

Revolution, not bloody. People demanded freedom, king gave it.

Lenin, who was a communist (as "reformists" are not)

Sorry, I call bullshit. Reformists can be communists, but not Marxists. Marx wasn't the be all and end all of the anti-establishment left.

Sorry, I call bullshit. Reformists can be communists, but not Marxists. Marx wasn't the be all and end all of the anti-establishment left.

I think it's useful to distinguish "communism" as defined by Marx & Engels in the "Communist Manifesto" from the broad anti-establishment left which would include such non-communists as Martin McGuinness, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong Il, and Catherine MacKinnon.

I think it's useful to distinguish "communism" as defined by Marx & Engels in the "Communist Manifesto" from the broad anti-establishment left which would include such non-communists as Martin McGuinness, Hugo Chavez, Kim Jong Il, and Catherine MacKinnon.

Yes, obviously (those guys aren't particularly anti-establishment, anyway ;)). But there are self identified communists that are reformists too. They, by one name or the other, have been around since before Marx, but nevertheless believe in a communal society. There are revolutionary communists that aren't orthodox Marxists either. Therefore my point stands - being a reformist does not exclude one from claiming themselves as a communist.

commie but a reformist rather than revolutionist... no guns thanks cos the proletariat won't be doing any violent revolts today! just a waste of time...
PM! And just when I was starting to really like you too! TSK! :p

Quick question for Maoists... anyone know where to find the lyrics (preferrably translated into English) of "The East is Red"?

Lenin, who was a communist (as "reformists" are not), said that THE fundamental question of any revolution was, "Has the oppressed class arms?" ....

The refusal of Allende's government to distribute arms to the populace was one of Castro's major points of criticism.

And Chavez seems to have picked up on this with his plans of a armed people's militia and promisies of popular resisitance to any repeat of American 'interferance' a la Chile.

But another Lenin quote; "A revolution teaches you the value of a rifle".

I think I follow Deluze (as evidenced by my nations slogon) and his idea of defensive violence in response to a capitalist reactionaries ie. "Flee, but while fleeing pick up a weapon". It seems likely that any communist/socialist revolution, whether violent or otherwise, would inevitably come across resistance from those with the most to loose. Whatsmore, historically resistance to communism/socialism has been met with force. This is something all 'revolutionaries' have to accept.

I have been toying with the idea of (brutaly) synthesising Fannon's healing/libertaing violence with Kants imperative 'treat people only as ends not means' to justifty 'active' revolutionary violence. Briefly, the death of the opressor MAY be justified if it puts an end to opression. But parralel to this the violence is psychologically liberating in and of itself. However, and i stress heavily, i am not sure that this position is sustainable or even viable at all.

Commie/gun

Though to be honest, I'm not a full-blown commie. I would prefer it, but I accept capitalism(read: pseudo-capitalist mixed economy) as what will be the system, and don't hate it with a passion.