If you live in the relative comfort of a first-world country...

If you live in the relative comfort of a first-world country, why the hell would you prefer going through a revolutionary war? Especially when there's no guarantee that a revolution would be successful.

Other urls found in this thread:

theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/28/hundreds-of-thousands-living-in-squalid-rented-homes-in-england
independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-living-standards-fall-longest-60-years-records-began-economy-household-incomes-costs-energy-a8071146.html
independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/food-poverty-parents-skip-meals-household-budget-debt-money-finances-feed-children-a8183426.html
independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/homelessness-rough-sleepers-record-england-stats-homeless-people-2017-increase-a8177086.html
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Civil_War
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Civil_War
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War
twitter.com/AnonBabble

It's not a matter of want, but when

And nobody in "The First World" is comfortable. Nobody in the EU is happy, nobody in Canada is happy, nobody in Britain is happy, ESPECIALLY nobody in America is happy

Everyone is pissed because of their circumstances.

I live in the EU, and I'm pretty sure a war would not make me happier than I am now.

You better get used to the idea.

Assuming that's true, wouldn't it be better to at least put it off for as long as possible?

No

why?

revolution doesn't have to take the shape of a war. Symbolic violence is far more powerful than physical violence. Humanity could wake up one day and just stop doing capitalism. It may sound sappily idealistic, but do we really have another option? Notice how our civilisation loves fantasies of collapse and catastrophe but there is no place in our imaginary for the inverse, the fantasy of positive change? When one person believes in it, it's an absurd fantasy, when millions of people start believing in it, it becomes a reality.

Why would the rich just give up their money though?

The gulf between rich and poor will continue for NATO nations to invest less into their people's future and more into war. Less into climate change, more intro austerity.

It will only reach a breaking point as it always has throughout history.

Considering climate change and people's lives it is not preferable to waste time.

Who said it was voluntary? Who said this was even about money and not class?

Who says I live in comfort.

Assuming you are the one who posted , then you seemed to imply it would be non-violent.

Aren't the two inextricably tied together?

No

Read Marx, come back.

We gotta give up on capitalism, money and the very concept of wealth and poverty. Only then can the real history of humanity begin, unchained from the commodity form, the state and alienated labor.

stopped reading there

Read

Marx

the status quo is already tremendously violent and alienating, and bound to get worse if capitalism continues. I see Revolution as a dramatic event that puts an end to the violence of the everyday once and for all.

OP is making honest questions and not being a dick and nu-Holla Forums isn't answering in kind

OP, The gist is that those with excessive wealth will continue to accumulate more at the expense of everyone else; everyone else resultant;y gets sick of their shit and revolts

If the proletariat refuses to ever revolt, they will likely face extinction and genocide, as their services are rendered redundant in the face of automation

A highly depopulated world without class (as the elimination of one class has taken place) and a fully provided for populace (the bourgeois needs are all provided for) would still technically be communism

The economy of the modern world is built on fiction.

The ecology of the modern world is suffocating because of humanity's consumption.

The energy resources necessary to power the modern world and keep billions of people alive are finite and becoming evermore scarce and impure.

A revolution is coming regardless of our desires or comfort levels. I'd just rather see it bend towards a collectivist mentality (one for all) rather than an individualistic one (all for one).

It's not a matter of income, it's a matter of ownership.

He who owns all the land and all the factories takes rent from everyone else. He pays some people more than others and then tells all the higher paid people that it's the lower paid people that are out to fuck him.

the only reason OP projects his fantasy of "relative comfort" is cause he's a petit-bourg faggot who has no idea about how much poverty and exploitation there still is in the first world
not a thing

nigger what

nu/lp/ is exactly this shit

try being nice, many of us are from petit bourg backgrounds, that doesn't mean you can't get #woke. resentiment helps no one. I don't understand third worldist type leftists, do they believe they are somehow morally and intellectually superior to their fellow whites/1st worldists/ petty bourgs?

But user, most Euros don't live in confort anymore:
theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/28/hundreds-of-thousands-living-in-squalid-rented-homes-in-england
independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/uk-living-standards-fall-longest-60-years-records-began-economy-household-incomes-costs-energy-a8071146.html
independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/food-poverty-parents-skip-meals-household-budget-debt-money-finances-feed-children-a8183426.html
independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/homelessness-rough-sleepers-record-england-stats-homeless-people-2017-increase-a8177086.html
(Sorry this is mostly the independent, but they all have figures with sources)
For the last 30 years this country has been going to the dogs, people are on the verge of breaking point.

third worldists are all from petty bourg familys in the first world to begin with

their politics are guilt and revenge

There is no real reason a revolution has to be a revolutionary war. It will almost certainly involve violence but there is no reason to think open warfare is somehow inevitible.

The state apparatuses in the former ML States were quite powerful and authoritarian but they were still toppled mainly through protest, rioting, and small scale violence.

It's part of the reason why /leftpol/ is getting so popular. Nobody wants to be around people high off the smell of their own farts.

I don't want a violent war. I'd prefer a non violent revolution from the inside (hacktivism is a okay tho).

Speak for yourself, huff up

...

I think I a much better question would be what precisely will the "left" do once the democratic/capitalist governments of the world do what they always do once the situation for the poor gets bad enough. I.E Bribes and lots of them. A red revolution can't get off the ground if the state bribes away the foot soldiers of such a movement with either direct monetary payments, more/better quality social services or more likely both of those things. The few who stick around for the "revolution" will be such a small and insignificant minority that the various security agencies will have an easy time discrediting/destroying them.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_Civil_War
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Civil_War
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

What about the American civil war, or all the civil wars the CIA and MI6, etc has sponsored lol

Seems far more cynical and unjustly motivated than just wanting to fucking live you need an intelligence agency on your side to cause international civil wars for you. Because god damn Marxists, we can't have those nations right to self determination, BRING IN THE COUP

fuck off gandhi

many of us are from petit bourg backgrounds
again, speak for yourself instead of projecting your petit-bourg background on others
I'm not a third worldist
that being said, if you're actually aware of how "relative comfort" is a meme, you're alright in my book, unlike OP

Good point, but a revolutionary situation will arise precisely because the capitalists ran out of time and cannot do any more bribing.


first line was supposed to be greentext

Because I live in a comfy padded cage and want to die. :D