Is revolution ethical?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Solidarity in Poland is the first one that came to my mind.

Good example.

Are you saying that it's impossible to throw off oppression because it will remain and/or return in new form sooner or later?

Not impossible, just there seem to be a lot of factors working again revolution throwing off oppression most of the time.

For a revolution to happen and be successful, the revolutionaries need to have a fairly significant amount of power, influence, resources, etc. themselves. Often, in the sort of oppressive society that people would want to overthrow, those with power, influence and resources got these things through oppression themselves and aren't necessarily willing to change tactics once they're in charge.

There are exceptions, of course, and I think the example of Poland is a good one.

 

[Kooky]

This is a very intelligent analysis.
That is why Politologists have invented the right term to describe the phenomenon: gatekeeping.

Gatekeepers are politicians who are hired by the economic elites to deceive the electorate, by making them believe they side against the very elites they work for.
So they gain the people's trust.
The people elect them to fight the elites.
But actually they will work for them behind the scenes.

That is why certain revolutions have miserably failed in the past. Because of gatekeepers.

Gatekeeping will ultimately increase people's rage.
Because in the 21th century it has been denounced and exposed.
Gatekeepers motivate people to rise up...even more, because they will have more reasons to do it.

Yes, most right-wing populists fall under that label. Their goal is, ultimately, to maximize political apathy and undirected resentment among the working class; mid term goalposts are usually to garner support for anti-labor movements by pandering to identity politics, exemplified by the numerous right-wing xenophobic movements that have been popping up all over Europe in the past two decades.

Another element of their gatekeeping tactics is to split the working class, singling out a specific portion of it as "the people" (along with the capitalists who support them) while the rest of the working class is being relegated to acceptable target status. We can see this especially in the treatment of immigrant labor by nominally "populist" movements throughout Europe.

 

[Kooky]

Compare this to the French or Russian Revolutions where people wanted to radically remake society according to their will and the application of reason, and found that what works "in theory" doesn't work in reality.

I can't think of a single criterium by which I could consider France better off under the Bourbon monarchy, and Russia better off under the Czars.

Likewise, I would have a hard time coming up with an argument demonstrating that the Haitians were better off as slaves than as free men.

But hey, you do you.

 

[Estro Felino]

Yes, most right-wing populists fall under that label. Their goal is, ultimately, to maximize political apathy and undirected resentment among the working class; mid term goalposts are usually to garner support for anti-labor movements by pandering to identity politics, exemplified by the numerous right-wing xenophobic movements that have been popping up all over Europe in the past two decades.

Another element of their gatekeeping tactics is to split the working class, singling out a specific portion of it as "the people" (along with the capitalists who support them) while the rest of the working class is being relegated to acceptable target status. We can see this especially in the treatment of immigrant labor by nominally "populist" movements throughout Europe.

Exactly. You got the point.
In Italy we have had parties who pretended to side against bankers and élites.
And...how did it end? They voted a motion of confidence to a banker...
So....

 

[Kooky]

Exactly. You got the point.
In Italy we have had parties who pretended to side against bankers and élites.
And...how did it end? They voted a motion of confidence to a banker...
So....

So you keep supporting these right-wing anti-labor parties because they share your disgust of non-Europeans and make vaguely populist noise, showcasing how pandering to conservative identity politics remains a winning strategy.

 

[Estro Felino]

So you keep supporting these right-wing anti-labor parties because they share your disgust of non-Europeans and make vaguely populist noise, showcasing how pandering to conservative identity politics remains a winning strategy.

Do you really think we should move 1 billion Africans to Europe?
If you do, tell me.
We will go take them with the planes.

 

[Kooky]

Do you really think we should move 1 billion Africans to Europe?
If you do, tell me.
We will go take them with the planes.

Yes, let us divide the working class. There are those who are worthy, and those who are unworthy. Only the worthy ones are allowed to count as "the people". Of course, who is worthy and part of "the people" is being decided by the elites who manufacture these populist talking points to begin with.

Once again, we can observe how xenophobic populism pushes anti-labor sentiments and anti-labor ideas, effectively undermining the interests of the working class and propping up elite rule by pandering to the prejudices and identity politics of petty bourgeois and conservative working class members.

 

[Kooky]

There are exceptions, of course, and I think the example of Poland is a good one.

I don't consider the current oppression of women and LGBT people in modern day Poland a laudable outcome, and that one is a direct consequence of the outsized influence of Catholic conservativism on the leaders who became prominent during and after the Solidarnosc revolution (such as e.g. Lech Walesa)

 

[Estro Felino]

Yes, let us divide the working class. There are those who are worthy, and those who are unworthy. Only the worthy ones are allowed to count as "the people". Of course, who is worthy and part of "the people" is being decided by the elites who manufacture these populist talking points to begin with.

Once again, we can observe how xenophobic populism pushes anti-labor sentiments and anti-labor ideas, effectively undermining the interests of the working class and propping up elite rule by pandering to the prejudices and identity politics of petty bourgeois and conservative working class members.

I am proud of my identity.
My people is 100% united against the élites because we are proud of our own identity and of who we are.
Of our complexion, of our language, of our culture

 

[Augustus]

I can't think of a single criterium by which I could consider France better off under the Bourbon monarchy, and Russia better off under the Czars.

Likewise, I would have a hard time coming up with an argument demonstrating that the Haitians were better off as slaves than as free men.

But hey, you do you.

You can't think of a single situation in which 2 countries that were implementing reforms could have continued this process of reformation in a manner that improved the lives of people while not leading to a) the reign of terror, genocide in the Vendee and the Napoleonic Wars or b) tens of millions of deaths including more genocide and the best part of a century of totalitarian oppression in Russia and half a century across a fair amount of Eastern Europe and the Balkans?

Pretty sure the Vendee civilians could, and the victims of the Napoleonic Wars and the Kulaks and the Ukrainian peasants and the Poles and the...

But hey, you do you...

 

[Kooky]

I am proud of my identity.
My people is 100% united against the élites because we are proud of our own identity and of who we are.

But not elites like Berlusconi, Salvini, and Meloni, of course, or any of their elite friends, elite business partners, and elite partners in crime (literally, when talking about Berlusconi). Only socialist "elites", and all those "elite" immigrants who slave away in Italy's agricorporations.

And in this we can see why there will be no working class uprising in Europe: Because the working class has been divided into the prideful and the prideless, the "producers" and the "parasites", those of the correct "culture" and the "savages". And the former will always march in lockstep with the capitalists.

Of our complexion, of our language, of our culture

I beg your pardon?

 

[Estro Felino]

But not elites like Berlusconi, Salvini, and Meloni, of course, or any of their elite friends, elite business partners, and elite partners in crime (literally, when talking about Berlusconi).

Only socialist "elites", and all those "elite" immigrants who slave away in Italy's agricorporations.


Pardon me?

If I became Prime Minister of my country I would use public money to help Africans in their own country.
I would certainly not let them come here to Europe which is filled with Europeans

 

[Kooky]

You can't think of a single situation in which 2 countries that were implementing reforms could have continued this process of reformation in a manner that improved the lives of people while not leading to a) the reign of terror, genocide in the Vendee and the Napoleonic Wars or b) tens of millions of deaths including more genocide and the best part of a century of totalitarian oppression in Russia and half a century across a fair amount of Eastern Europe and the Balkans?

Pretty sure the Vendee civilians could, and the victims of the Napoleonic Wars and the Kulaks and the Ukrainian peasants and the Poles and the...

So what you're telling me is that you could come up with all those alternate history path for literally every single revolution but the American one. Why, what made America so special that its elites were literally incapable of reaching a similar sort of peaceful compromise as you assume the French bourgeois and the Russian workers would have with their absolutist monarchs?

Also, is there a particular reason why you didn't address my comments re: Haiti?

 

[Kooky]

If I became Prime Minister of my country I would use public money to help Africans in their own country.
I would certainly not let them come here to Europe which is filled with Europeans

Yes, it's become clear to me that you would rather imagine yourself at the top of a hierarchy, than daring to imagine such a hierarchy not existing in the first place.

Could you elaborate on why you feel "pride" for your "complexion"?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If I became Prime Minister of my country I would use public money to help Africans in their own country.
I would certainly not let them come here to Europe which is filled with Europeans

I thought you said you were a leftist, no?

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I think at the same time you have to ask "Is maintaining the status quo ethical?"

 

[Augustus]

So what you're telling me is that you could come up with all those alternate history path for literally every single revolution but the American one. Why, what made America so special that its elites were literally incapable of reaching a similar sort of peaceful compromise as you assume the French bourgeois and the Russian workers would have with their absolutist monarchs?

No, what I'm saying is a) at the time of the revolution, both countries were undergoing processes of reformation that would have continued b) the harms mentioned were direct consequences of the revolutions you mentioned as being unquestionably better than the alternative in every conceivable way.

I disagreed they were better in every conceivable way as both led to tyranny and tens of millions of deaths, mostly of poor people by despotic elites or foreign oppressors, which, at least in my book, is a pretty ****ing big downside. There is a good chance that more gradual reforms would have led to better outcomes, seeing as these both led to very bad outcomes.

But, you do you.

 

[Kooky]

No, what I'm saying is a) at the time of the revolution, both countries were undergoing processes of reformation that would have continued b) the harms mentioned were direct consequences of the revolutions you mentioned as being unquestionably better than the alternative in every conceivable way.

So you think revolutions happen out of the blue in order to halt existing efforts to reform, rather than being a possible violent consequence of a government's inability to enact needed reforms in due time.

Given how completely both the Bourbons and the Romanovs failed to enact any meaningful reforms in the run up to their respective revolutions, and how there is plenty of evidence that neither actually wanted reforms to begin with, how likely would you rate it that they could have miraculously found the necessary motivation, effort and political capital in time?

What do you think about the Haitian revolution?

But, you do you.

Did I strike a nerve with my comment, or is there another reason for these petty displays of resentment?

 

[Augustus]

So you think revolutions happen out of the blue in order to halt existing efforts to reform, rather than being a possible violent consequence of a government's inability to enact needed reforms in due time.

No. You just invented that.

Given how completely both the Bourbons and the Romanovs failed to enact any meaningful reforms in the run up to their respective revolutions, and how there is plenty of evidence that neither actually wanted reforms to begin with, how likely would you rate it that they could have miraculously found the necessary motivation, effort and political capital in time?

Russian and French reforms had been ongoing for years. No doubt they had to be pushed, but successful reforms often take time. That is an unfortunate reality that no amount of wishful thinking will change.

Instead, in both cases you ended up with domination by social elites who decided they knew best and got to do what they wanted as they were the smartest guys in the room. So they used force to capitalise on the situation to promote their own radical interests against those of the average person. The consequences were tens of millions of deaths and the continued oppression of poor people by (foreign) elites.

As I said, what works in theory often doesn't work quite that well in the real world.

Of course it is reasonable to look in more detail at the situations and evaluate the pros and cons of the revolutions. However, when someone can't even see the possibility that things could have gone differently and better than tens of millions of deaths and mass oppression, that is the mark of an ideologue.

What do you think about the Haitian revolution?

Not exactly an example of a successful revolution given people ended up being 'serf' tied to their plantations and being lashed by a black elite. Although this was likely, on average, better than the previous situation and the intervention of foreign powers didn't exactly help their chances of success.

At best, a terrible situation became very bad.

Did I strike a nerve with my comment, or is there another reason for these petty displays of resentment?

Any reason you consistently start with the petty displays of resentment then get precious when people reply in kind when you could just reply to posts in a manner that shows you are trying to have a reasonable conversation in good faith?

Petty displays of resentment are no problem, it's just the people who combine them with the thinnest of skins that I find a bit silly.

 

[Estro Felino]

I thought you said you were a leftist, no?

Define Leftist.