Without the army, a revolution is impossible

Faggots. Maybe too.

You guys are why people hate the left. Yes, the police are protecting an oppressive system. This does not necessarily make them evil or beyond redemption, it makes them our misguided brothers. Do you think treating them like shit will win them or others over to our side? Most of them actually think they protect and serve the people, maybe not in the shithole where you live, but definitely where I'm from. I would like them by my side. Violence and death only when necessary, not because some punks wants to "stick it to the man".

They keyword there is 'think'. They think they protect and serve the people, but they do not, the oppress them.

YES!

EXACTLY!

THAT IS LITERALLY WHAT WE HAVE BEEN SAYING THIS ENTIRE TIME! THEY ARE BRAINWASHED!

Its not their fault that they bought into the exact same lie that nearly every single other human being in society has fallen victim too.

It's not their fault, but they'll still act in the interest of capital, which is why we'll have to kill them. Their material conditions determine how they'll act during a revolution.

And how is this different from soldiers?

We will only have to kill them if we fail i our duty to make them realize their position in the machine of capital and the immense power that they have to elevate not only themselves but the whole of society.

If the revolution comes and half of the police force says fuck this and abandons their posts when they are supposed to be suppressing protesters then that helps us immensely.

There is however a difference between the actual police and hired government enforcers. After the initial defections start to cripple the system the government reaches out in search of anyone to act as enforcers on behalf of the established order. We saw this in Russia with the Autocracy's endorsement of the black hundreds, a proto-fascists, black shirt wearing group of violent ultra conservatives who supported the Czar, and we saw it in Egypt during their revolution when people from the rural outskirts marched calvalry through crowds of demonstrators and it was later revealed that they were payed by the government.

youtube.com/watch?v=4k0_9Y1XaC8

These people are fundamentally different from the police because they are already completely ideologically committed to the existing order.

The police are paid government enforcers. Unless you can offer the police a better deal in the immediate stages of a revolution they will not side with the people. They have too much to lose to risk potential gains in a revolution that might not even be successful. Anyone who thinks otherwise is either delusional or a liberal that just found out that socialism doesn't mean the government does stuff.

The police are paid government enforcers but they aren't black shirts.

Police officers in a lot of areas in the country have lost their unions and their pensions and have generally been treated like shit by the system that is supporting them because they are low skilled workers who are easily replaceable. If we can offer them a better alternative, and it wont be hard, then we can convince all but the most indoctrinated and ill informed.

The proletarian state can't fight an imperialist war of the type you are imagining.

The proletarian state can only serve its purpose in an actual civil war.

By the time the red army develops an air force, the revolution will have already been defeated, probably for years.

The forces of the bourgeois state must turn their guns towards their masters as has happened repeatedly throughout history. The development of communism (the proletarians' movement to negate itself) and its eruption in revolution is a material force that will have turn much of the forces of the state against them.

Holy naivete batman

...

The only way a socialist state would be able to even exist in any situation other than global communism it would have to have an army to defend itself from other global powers who would want to see the threat to their power destroyed. Which do you honestly think is more likely, the whole world revolts all at once and we throw out the state and all the heavy weapons immediately or, the thing that has actually happened, a state that wishes to achieve communism has to fortify itself and attempt to work incrementally towards communism.

But it's in their interest to protect the state.

But why? And how are they different from soldiers in this regard?

Eva a shit.

Because the state grants them a place of muh privilege and authority for the role they play.

I don't think it's a guarantee that soldiers will side with the proletariat. Especially in the US. But the main difference is that it's normalized in police culture to brutalize their community. Military culture revolves around attacking the foreign other.

I mean you would still need people to respond to domestic abuse calls and violence in the community after the revolution and these people will probably be the people who did the exact same thing before the revolution.

The people who uphold common law, cops, commissars, whatever you want to call them, will always have a position of authority in society.

There is no reason to not just give the cops that defect public safety jobs doing all the dirty shit we don't want to do when the revolution is over. Like dealing with violent crime.

Yeah nah

there is no such thing
As long as the state exists, it is an impediment to socialism, existing only out of necessity to combat the bourgeoisie

I'm not against an army per se, but we need to recognize the limits to it.
We need to understand that nothing can destroy capitalist social relations, and maintain the social relations required to fight an imperialist war (capitalist ones) at the same time.

I still don't see why this makes all of them immune to class consciousness and to understand the benefits of a revolution. Harder to turn and more likely that many will not turn, yes, but I don't see this as a reason to murder all members of the police forces.

As for the soldiers: I don't see how a revolution is even possible without significant military support.

Where I'm from it is not in the police's culture to brutalize their community, at least far from what seems to be normal in the US. I think the biggest obstacle here will be to convince them that the current state of society is not preferable to a revolution, as with all other people of this country.

How come I have a shotgun then?

Only the army can grow Class Con.
The police is too entrenched in Ideology.
All you need is a deep enough crises and a chapter that has grown Class Con. Not the whole army. Having most of the army fighting a pointless war for long enough also helps. (Do it like Lenin).

...

A state will always be necessary on one level or another to handle crisis situations like natural disasters and invasions, no matter how communist and classless it is you will never be able to effectively coordinate with the other billions of people on the planet who you have never met and dont speak the same language as.

And the state must maintain an army unless full communism has been achieved. Its the only way to protect the revolution.

I know gun laws are different throughout Europe but I cited the UK specifically because I knew that they don't allow anything.

Can you seriously go be a fucking liberal somewhere else, the entire board has called you out for it at some point or another. You suck at Marxism btw.

Then how do you go hunting in UK?
Do they allow bow and arrow?

Some of them might be convinced. I doubt it will be a significant enough portion to make it a primary concern.

Why?

I think you made a wrong turn somewhere.

What a well thought out and reasoned refutation of my argument with specific examples and sources.

Truely you have silenced me forever and have proved once and for all that I am, in fact, a nigger faggot liberal and you are the king of internet communism.

Better than nothing I guess.

No, that is exactly what a state is. A pure democracy is a state, even if it doesn't have any type of hierarchy.

At the end of the day there will need to be mechanisms to deal with sudden disasters otherwise humanity will collapse under its own massive size.

If there is no state, no elections, and all decision making is made locally, and New Orleans floods again, where will the help come from? You think people will just pick up their lives by themselves at will to go fix a city over a thousand miles away?

Yeah they allow bows and arrows and swords and stuff. You can even own a crossbow for hunting but I have known people in the UK who have gotten a criminal charge because they had a literal butter knife on their person outside of their home.

Useful for overthrowing the government?
No

Useful for shooting a robber in the face down the hallway?
Yes.

Because we will all be shot by monday.

Seriously read a fucking book.

here.

The "shoot the robber" meme .. I realy find it hillarious.

Who the fuck is gonna rob WHAT from me?
I'm not rich. Is he gonna take my PC and sell it?

I just don't get all the panic…

That's a very vague definition of a state. Most leftists describe a state as a hierarchical organization that comes about to preserve the ruling classes hegemony and exists to deal with arising class tensions that stem from the inherent class contradictions present in capitalism. It also has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force.

Some dude was shot around the corner from me over his iPhone. People do crazy shit in capitalism.

You can own any gun you like so as long as you have a "valid" reason to do so i.e. the police are at their discretion to approve or deny a gun certificate assuming a doctor can vouch that you are mentally sound.

The certificate costs £50 a year, and you must inform the police of exactly how many guns and how many bullets that you own, and if you're travelling with your guns and ammo, you must inform the police in advance or otherwise face arrest, confiscation of weapons and a criminal prosecution if you're stopped with weapons away from where you last reported they are being held.

Essentially, if you're British, you're only allowed hunting shotguns and rifles, which would also mean you must have a hunting license to do so and provide reasonable evidence that you spend time hunting ie live near wildlife or as an active member of a hunting club.

this

this

Guess whose door they'll be kicking in first.

Stopped reading there

This is why I am not an orthodox Marxist.

He is essentially saying that the system will be entirely self regulating, with no need for maintenance, and no need for higher organization.

Tsunamis, hurricanes, tornado's and Earth quakes will just stop happening after communism is achieved I guess.

It doesn't matter what you call it, its a state, a state of by and for the people, I will give you that, but if it has any authority or power to do literally anything than it is a state.

Community organization doesn't actually mean anything if the community has no actual means of pushing for anything

Most gun owners in the UK are reactionary wealthy bourgeoisie given that hunting and guns are both expensive pursuits.

Though I imagine in the future, they'll check your online data like your facebook or google account and see if you've liked or posted anything pro-socialist or pro-revolutionary and blacklist you before you have a chance to even own a gun.

There must always be an organization, albeit far less powerful than the state we know today, that has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. The problem comes when that power isn't firmly rooted with the will of the people.

Individuals or groups of individuals cannot be allowed to make themselves kings of patches of territory. You cant just throw your hands up in that situation and decide that there is nothing you can do about it.

Individuals will always stand in the way of the whole getting the best possible outcome because of personal interests and those people cannot be allowed to do these things but at the same time you cant have lynch mobs running through the streets. Power needs to be kept under tight reign's, so that it doesn't fly out of control, but also so that it can be directed to serve the will of the people.

I feel bad for you homie

english.columbia.edu/files/english/content/Critique_of_Violence.pdf

Please fucking read something.

what in the actual fuck?

You don't get this whole "communism" thing do you?

gr8 argument m8

you are still presupposing a state

read some marx user

Nigger I don't think the fucking American electoral system and fucking voting booths in elementary schools with the electoral college is the pinnacle of democracy.

Why are you projecting this onto me? When did I ever differentiate between one vote one man, black rock in jar for no, white rock in jar for yes, and the representative democracy we have right now?

The reason you are confused is because you are inserting 15 extra qualifiers into the sentence that I never said so that you can pigeon hole me into being some kind of champion of liberal ideology and capitalism.

You actually are tho.

At least use it as a source or quote it or something you lazy fuck.

You are still failing to identify the mechanism with which the world deals with sudden massive disasters that require coordination and organization without a state.

Unless the answer is nothing, which i'm starting to think it is.

the global centralized economic organization

to speculate on the specific organizational form is Utopianism

Town divided on weather to do thing A or thing B

Some people want one thing other people want other thing.

"Let's, as a community, come together in a common location and cast ballots and who ever receives a majority of votes will have their action passed."

"YOU FUCKING LIBERAL PIECE OF SHIT! HOW DARE YOU SUBVERT THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE BY SUGGESTING THAT THEY EXERT THEIR WILL IN THE FORM OF A POPULAR BALLOT! YOU GETTING EVERYONE TOGETHER TO MAKE PROGRESS IN THEIR COMMUNITY IS ANTI-COMMUNITY!"

There are in the same class as us and dont own the means of production. They have the potential to become our homies if we succeed in our job of convincing them that its better on our side, which it is.

Same thing

Unless the entire planet is in a constant state of stagnation and nothing that requires more than 20 people to fix ever happens then there will always be the need for higher organization in the form of a state. You can pretend its not a state, you can call it something else, but its still a state.

I have yet to get an answer to how this society where no one votes and there is no government of any kind takes care of a situation like New Orleans flooding.

Oh so a global centralized organization that has pull all over the globe and can exert its will wherever and whenever it wants?

HHHHHHMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

Nope. Not a state. No way.

In other words there is no actual plan and you are all just hoping for the best that it all works out well in the end even though you have no idea what the end could ever possibly look like.

Asymmetric warfare do require at least some participants. Having no military support suggests there is also very little support among the people, too, as I see it. We'd be LARPers running around the woods with little chance of spreading the flame.

Class consciousness among plenty of workers will likely also bring some military support. Now I can see asymmetric warfare happening.

I said no state, not no government.

There is surely an administrative apparatus, but it is not separate from any other aspect of life.

it has no political functions. "It", or the people who make it up, has/have no material interests apart from those of the entire society.

You are presupposing the drive towards individual competition and atomism, perfected in bourgeois society. It is, in reality, an effect of a particular level of development of the productive forces and is specific to certain relations of production. The forces of production have developed way past that point and to the point where those relations of production are a hindrance to social progress.

A state is a system of social coercion. A tool used to create and enforce class hierarchy. It's an extension of capitalism.

What an idealistic wind bag.

When the money is coming your way you don't ask questions.

...

get the fuck off this board and never come back.

See:

The only good cop is a dead one.

Don't you have homework to do?

WELL MEMED MY LAD.

...

Like we needed more proofs all lefties are literally niggers.

Someone who joined the military is different than someone who makes a career out of being a class traitor. Most people are recruited at a young age when they haven't really developed a proper world view. Some join due to misguided patriotism but the majority do so out of desperation or alienation. They're victims of the state as well.

Fuck cops tho

Fuck off. Literally anyone who joins the cause of socialism is a comrade.

Is your uncle a cop or something?

Yeah I have less hate for them, and I realize a lot just do it for a paid education + guaranteed job. But if you actually toured in Iraq because of all the GWB era patriotism you're a lost cause.

Why I'll never be a Marxist tbh.

Unlike you, I'm not merely a leftist so I can be smug on the internet. I'm trying to replace capitalism, and this is not a battle where we can afford to pick and choose our allies.

No comment.

You realize you'll be fighting these people if a revolution ever happens right?

And you want them to be on your side?

P counter rev, tbh.

I'll be fighting whatever ones decide to defend capitalism.

Sometimes I think all these state cucks need is a good time spent in prison. (Or really any interaction with the police.)
that will teach them how much the state gives a fuck about them.

Well that's who we're talking about.

Or a fucking brain.

No, you're talking about cops in general, not cops who happen to decide to fight the revolution.

No we aren't you dishonest piece of shit. This entire thread FROM THE BEGINNING has been about how to get these people onto our side.

"Cop" isn't some intrinsic trait that these people are born with. It's a voluntary profession. If you're actively fighting the state I don't think you would be considered a cop anymore.

Dude, they will never be on our side.
There May be some anomalies but the general rule is that cops are class traitors.

Even if they were class aware do you think they give a fuck? Look at the ammount of power they have.
They also live a pretty nice fucking life with this whole "Cops risking there lives shtick" lining their pockets.

Again, like, said, why the fuck would they give a shit? They are getting paychecks and we aren't. They have every incintive to fight against the working class.

Would you even trust an ex-cop who joins the revolution?

Let me spell it out, dipshit. There are two groups of people:

-Defenders of the revolution: civilians, cops, and soldiers

-Defenders of capitalism: also civilians, cops and soldiers

People in this thread have been objecting IN PRINCIPLE to fighting alogside any cops that join the revolution, or even trying to convince any to join. I'm trying to point out how retarded this is.

Yeah no shit. Next you're going to point out how the soldiers who joined the bolsheviks were no longer employees of the tsar.

FUCK NO
U
C
K

N
O

Prob not.
Informants be up in our blocs erry time.

Yes. Every human being alive acts in their own economic self interest.

Virtually none in the grand scheme of things all they can really do is detain you and its up to the justice system and a judge to decide your fate from there.

Not to mentions cops get paid dirt for the work and hours that they pull. Increasing your standard of living substantially trumps getting to vent your frustrations by occasionally getting away with beating up a brown person.

No.

Yeah probably.

At the point of revolution noone would be in the position of denying manpower.

Would I let someone who I knew was a cop into my circle of activists who are planning on making a move? No. That would be retarded.

If you know that police defend capitalism and those that defected wouldn't be cops anymore why do you get defensive when I say I don't like cops?

Don't talk to me liberal.

Cops get paid next to nothing I dont know where you are getting your horse shit from.

Uh, and that economic interest is them having capital and having authority."
Humans aren't rational actors, either, m8.

...

see

You never had an argument and you never will.

Just for clarification, all me:

W E W

meanwhile people are having heat strokes moving stock for 8 bucks an hour.
Or trying to kill themselves in china but can't cause nets catch them.

Those pigs also have a bunch of fun toys too play with.

BTFO: Double agent.

Well if all humans are irrational then there is no point in any of this is there?

Noone will ever revolt because we are all so fundamentally irrational.

Unless you are implying that there is something biologically different between regular people and cops that makes cops more likely to allow themselves to be exploited than other human beings then you should just give up socialism all together.

I know fork lift operators who get paid $25 an hour are they capitalist scum too?

Are you a fucking retard? Of course you can't be a cop while fighting the state. Did you thing that needed spelling out? At best your comments are irrelevant, at worst, they imply a logical impossibility.

*think

Median police police salary is 56k without overtime tacked on. Median full time US salary is 45k. They do pretty well.

Also I work 8 hours a day for 5 days a week making $7.50 an hour don't preach to me about dirt wages and accuse me of being some kind of spooky CIA plant.

You didn't answer my question. Why do you care if I don't like cops?

That's not true.

All that means is that there are people who will act rationally and people who will not.

Humans not being rational actors has nothing to do with the fact humans are capable of being rational. Just most cops are reactionary fuck wits and most reactionary fuck wits are irrational, right wing, nationalists.

Wow, holy shit, I can scarcely imagine such riches. No wonder they can't empathise with us!

Why did you need to butt into this fucking thread with your weebshit avatarfagging and say how much you hate them when it wasn't relevant?

No, but, they also don't get paid to beat working class to death either, so. . .

different person.

...

Is a fork lift operator a state actor who is given authority over the proletariat? Is a fork lift operator's main function to enforce property rights and protect class hierarchy?

Nobody suggested they live lavish lives. They're comfortable and given power over their community. That's why they are class enemies.

Once a soldier or cop defect to a ongoing revolution, could he still be called a soldier or police?

They have. Maybe some might. But this shouldn't be a concern.

A cop's main function is to do what he's fucking told, like every wage slave.

I don't doubt that a lot of them are reactionary. But they are generally much better trained and organized than your average cashier prole, and have good access to firearms and equipment. Plus there are a fuckton of them. They could be a wonderful asset.

I said there would be anomalies.

Seriously, can you please fuck off. It's really obv you are a double agent.

This isn't fucking spykids you spaz.

Your paranoia has reached Holla Forums levels.

"S-Shill! How dare you express dissent! Obviously anyone who disagrees with me is a plant from the CIA! I am not an insane person."

Winston Smith had plenty comrades working, chatting and sharing his daily routine with him.
All of them would have him dead/tortured/incarcerated/vanished if the slightest doubt was cast on his orthodoxy.

Have cops in my family and my personal experience is that :

-Whether they believe themselves thugs or not, they are.
-Whether they believe themselves drunk on authority or not, they are.
-They are not your allies, even those whose allegiance doesn't rest with porky are still heavily conditioned/indoctrinated
and have an extreme aversion to whatever they perceive as "disorder/unrest/indiscipline", and
I'm talking about everyone,from the orangutan meat heads in riot armor to the meekest office potato/traffic chump.
Very little exceptions.
-From my previous point, you will NOT gain ANY allies from the officials unless you buy them with something and the overwhelming majority of the underlings wont move a finger without them.

So basically the only way you are going to find allies in the police is by reducing them to proles with no power, once they are extracted from the ranks, they are as useful as any other prole
but much more dangerous to enlist for your cause.

Also

fucking delicious

fuck me

Oh it isn't is it? Like, seriously, tell that to all the commies and socialists who got deported in the 20th century.
Do your fucking homework (if you actually aren't just a fucking shill.)

Why are you white knighting for the police?

Yeah… that's not retarded at all.

Holla Forums is an irrelevant backwater of a board in the grand scheme of things and radical leftists are passe now.

The CIA is tracking down jihadists not larping socialists.

Wasn't there something a few years ago about how individual soldiers ended up supporting Ron Paul more than any other candidate?

Now, Paul is right-wing, but he's hardly an establishment conservative or anything like that. Which means they can be persuaded to join our side, because they're not merely repeating what they see on the news.

Read this article, it was great to get an idea of the mentality imparted on US soldiers by the military schools.

jacobinmag.com/2012/08/sarah-lawrence-with-guns

You seriously think that people aren't paid to fucking be subversives?

Kill yourself, dude.

ITT: Reactionary fuck wit

It doesn't matter if you would fight or not, because your imput is immaterial.

Those who refuse to fight with fucking cops or fucking soldiers are the same people who refuse to support Bernie because they're not supporting a fucking politician, refuse to defend anti-Imperialist movements because they're not defending the fucking state, and shit on every self-liberation movement because they're not supporting any fucking nationalist group.

People who want to be exempt from the most traditional forms of political dialogue are not going to grab a gun and fight at any point. Their views are carefully constructed to avoid ever stepping out of the comfort zone.

It's not like we're going to own enough equipment to fight the army m8. We need enough to push for the revolution and then hope that part of the army will join.

Nice meme fam. Also:

Spotted the demsuck.

If your plan hinges on the military attaining class consciousness you might as well pack it in now.

It was an anti leftist coalition that was created by the government in THE FUCKING 1960's!

Communists aren't a threat anymore, to anyone.

I, like many communists, am a former reactionary. Most people aren't born communists for fucks sake, if you exclude everyone who was ever opposed to the revolution then there will be no revolution.
That said, cops aren't to be trusted since they have a material interest in taking down revolutionary movements, not only is it how they maintain their job and therefore position of relative power, but they can also get higher pay/promotions through doing so.

But wouldn't having someone on the inside be incredibly useful?

Traditional forms of political dialogue as opposed to rupture, revolution.

That video doesn't show the footage of the cop getting out of the car. it's funny how the cop is a huge tank who got hit by a metal rod and didn't care
It shows how we have to be more physically able to fight in the streets

After some contact with american leftists I'm starting to wonder which demographic you haven't given up yet. The exact same thing is constantly said about the american South, american white workers, and often americans altogether. You people say that about liberals, conservatives, libertarians, SJWs, the middle-class, everything. Apparently, the only class with revolutionary potential up there are humanities & arts students.

If you're going to keep that mentality you might as well pack it in with me, because no revolution is ever going to be achieved by what presently constitutes the Left in the developed world. The expansion of our numbers into establishments and segments of society we're typically excluded from is not just a hope, it's an absolute condition for our victory.

Yeah. The bourgeoisie would love to have a plant in the revolution.

Worker coops will slowly replace capitalist businesses and one day we will live in market socialism without there being any specific point we can point to as being the start of socialism.

What are you taking about? The revolution hinges on the radicalization of the proletariat. Some will join. Some won't. Whether the military and police achieve class consciousness should not determine whether the movement will be successful or if it should be undertaken at all.

top fuckin kek

Yes, that really seems to be where history is headed with 1% of the population owning half of the global wealth.

We have to keep arguing our points and people will voluntarily make a change.
uk.coop/sites/default/files/uploads/attachments/worker_co-op_report.pdf
Also you have to give right-wingers the chance to pretend they've always agreed with us once we've slowly dragged them into the future.

But it does, because once psychological discipline breaks down, physical discipline comes into play, and more societies have been governed by the latter as a principle than the former.

We're talking here about an inviolable law of revolution. Popular sentiment by itself is not institutionalized into public practice. Once this sentiment no longer finds common ground with the owning elites, it'll be met with force. This is the lesson of the 20th century m8, and ignoring it will not make it go away.

Revolutions have been won without military support. That's a fact that you keep ignoring.

Obviously it's preferable to have them on your side but you're putting too much emphasis on it. Asymmetrical fighting does not require military support.

This is like the argument of reformism capitalism through democracy, except that now it's through market choice instead of the vote, which makes it even more retarded.

No they won't, people will choose convenience every time, and as wealth becomes more and more concentrated, so do the means of supplying cheap goods and offering innovation. And many, if not most people, can not afford to buy consciously at all. If they accept to buy chinese labour, they will not be convinced to stop buying capitalism altogether.

And you're not going to start a coop that will outcompete slave labour, political ties, access to cheap resources, and just the entire bourgeois habitus itself (contacts, networking, finance, etc) which is why most coops have been limited to few industries.

And if it ever became a serious threat to private property, there are millions of measures that could be taken against it. Most products are bought through privately-owned services or in privately-owned places, most big businesses depend on financial support to survive, and most industries on political support.

Okay, let's start naming a few and judge them case by case.

I can guarantee you whatever revolution will name will fit two scenarios: either they had a foreign entity acting as the supplier of material, intelligence and training that military institutions should provide, or they were done with the help of the owning elites (if not the military elites themselves) against a particular figure. Or some other circumstancial shit like that.

To make it short, military counterrevolution didn't happen because it would be superfluous, whatever government fell had already lost the means of political power.

And asymmetrical fighting also doesn't work. It would be like the guerrillas in south america: can they survive and win battles? Yes. But they're also so systematically excluded from the economic life of the country that their entire presence is immaterial in terms of being a threat to the establishment. A socialist revolution has to occupy the factories and buildings and be able to hold them.

Bribing them!
I mean, if there were to be a communist society without any official currency, what would there be to lose?

Because military people have jobs and contribute to society, unlike you.

Literally how do they contribute to society other than the fact they get paid money?

Take a load of this nigga.

So you admit you don't have a job. What a surprise!

And we make money off of arms sales. Lots of money. So much money we can even afford to give free shit to you so you can shitpost on a korean image board. After all, it is capitalism that must fund socialism!

I do have a job fam it actually involves hard manual labor in the productive sector.

Money from arms sales is profit earned by selling to another nation's unproductive military sector and in any case it isn't near enough to off-set the enormous tax-payer born costs of keeping up the war machine.

But by all means, don't let that critique stand in the way of your blind acceptance of the American ideology that anyone who has a job and earns money is both productive and deserves what they earn.

Economic illiterate–Smith would have spit in your fucking face.

Government jobs whose salaries are subsidised by taxpayers.
Filing paperwork and attacking impoverished foreigners does not constitute "contributing to society."
Kill yourself, scummy militarist.

How can one claim that Communism is an ideology centered around worker's liberation when they hold a position like this?

Soldiers and police officers are also victims of capitalist exploitation, and have been for time immaterial. Most of these people are petit bourgeois that need to be re-educated, not vicious monsters that deserve to be lined up and shot by edgy, sixteen year old weebs that shitpost on Holla Forums.

"Cops perpetuate gang violence"
"Soldiers perpetuate violence in the Middle East"

You'd have to be absolutely retarded to think that these actions are done at the volition of individual cops. Instead of simply rounding them all up, why don't you take out the main actors, such as their bourgeois commanders?

As proley as your analysis and class war recommendations tend to be, I don't see why you would take this line.

Soldiers and cops are tools of the repressive apparatus of the bourgeois state. Even if they come from working class when they join they quit being proles. Not in the sense that they lose their prior working class consciousness, though this happens, but because they quit to be economically proletarian. They cease to be productive workers, and worse then that they are usually paid fairly decent salaries with taxes collected by the bourgeois state–they don't scrap and struggle for work in the private sector.

At least you recognize that most of them are:
but the problem here is I just don't see how it squares with your claim that their victims of capitalist exploitation.

Now sure we will continue to influence where possible and try convince them to stop serving the bourgeois-imperialist state but I'm gonna bet this won't be a real problem until they wrecked by real opposition. The Russian Army didn't see mass desertions until it was smashed by WWI; mass conversions of US soldiers to an ant-war/pro-communist position did not happen until the US was getting pwned by the Vietcong.

Even if you think every GI is an exploited prole yearning to be free, military training is literal brainwashing fam. You don't break that with some fancy words. We don't even have draftees like we did in the past, we have what some naively call the "poverty draft". It's hard to feel sorry for them when government assistance and/or lumpen economic activities still exist. Living on welfare or selling drugs, from the point of view of the internationalist proletariat, is not worse than participating in imperialist war. That being said we will probably always have some disillusioned ex-soldiers in our movement.

But, soldiers won't start killing their commanders like they did in Vietnam and waging class war in the trenches until the imperialist war machine loses badly.

Ah yes, because most soldiers are rich upper class people who fight wars on the side in between their property investments.

Much of those who make up the core of our military are lower to middle class people. Many of them from rural or poorer backgrounds, there are plenty of servicemen and women in many militaries just to make a living. The people who politicians throw into harms way are the ones they view as expendable - impressionable young people from poor backgrounds, while their own children study to be doctors and lawyers.

Also, if you think that throwing away people with skills that are useful for your revolution is smart, you're an idiot. If you want a revolution to be fought, you will need to have people who are trained.

How many in the Red Army had fought for the Tsar? How many who fought for the Republicans in Spain had been trained alongside the Nationalists?

The answer is a lot.

Association with the prior state is not original sin.

you realise the military prey on the ill-educated and criminal? How about we just gas everyone with an IQ of less than 110? Life of crime or military, And then cunts like you attack them for it. You people are self-important shit-heads.

I don't know what to say m'fam other than to point out I never said that ex-soldiers couldn't participate in the movement or that the participation of active duty GIs in class struggle against their officers would be a bad thing.

If their so sensitive that they can't be told the truth about what their doing and what their job actually is, then they aren't going to be of much use to the revolution.

Even if we tell prospective recruits and try to convince them that they'd be be killing their class brothers then we're being very naughty then cause we're bursting their bubble about a stable career with potential for advance.

It seems milcucks just want us to be silent about the whole thing, even if in the event of an actual revolution we'd have a lot more to worry about than just a GI's hurt feelings.

The vietcong riddled GIs with bullets until they started to rethink themselves and to admirably join in the class struggle. But you think we will achieve better results with kinds words and avoiding hurt feelings, even if that strategy has never shown actual success anywhere?

I think relentless attacks drive them to the other side.