Reminder: This post is from the Community Actual Discussion. We try to use voting for elevating constructive, or lowering unproductive, posts and comments here. When disagreeing, replies detailing your views are highly encouraged as no-discussion downvotes don’t help anyone learn anything valuable. For other rules, please see this pinned thread. Thanks!
We’re back! Instead of putting a neutral topic in the introduction, I’m placing a bit of opinion on an issue to see if it helps spur discussion. We are also actively seeking moderators and people who enjoy discussion (and understand that being wrong is an important part of being a better person)! Send me a message if you’d like to help out.
This week, I’d like to discuss something that I’ve not seen discussed much elsewhere.
Many on Lemmy are the type to want to see their government go through a revolution of some kind and think that slow change is impossible, but what happens after? Say you get a group and topple the oligarchy or shitty government in power, what then?
Some Starters (and don’t feel you have to speak on all or any of them if you don’t care to):
- How do you defend what you’re building from those who have more resources than you?
- What does the government look like?
- Would you keep anything from the old systems?
- What kind of leaders would you need?
- How do you stop it from turning into the NEXT horrible thing?
“Revolution” as a means for any kind of positive change in any modern western society is pure fantasy by and for those who haven’t applied sufficient critical thinking to the idea. The questions you posed illustrate this perfectly, as they’re unanswerable in any realistic revolutionary scenario.
Revolutions are not won by a bunch of common people waving a few pitchforks around and then going back to their daily lives. Toppling a government requires force and some kind of organized military action. That means to be effective you need command structures and centralization of authority. The new authorities that are thus installed are going to be in it entirely for personal gain and acquisition of more power. They will always be either so greedy and selfish that no amount of power and influence acquired through more peaceful processes will ever seem enough, or so radical and extreme that they cannot work with any existing structures to affect any change over the longer term.
About the only exception to this would be if an administration held onto more power/authority than they had been granted and there was military action to remove them and restore the status quo, but that’s more of a benevolent coup than a revolution.
Political action will always be more effective at change than revolution as long as a shred of democratic structure exists. And if you can’t enact sufficient political action to affect change, you have no chance at a successful revolution.
How do you defend what you’re building from those who have more resources than you?
More like how do you prevent outside influences from reinstalling the previous government? History has shown that wealthy elites will help each other collectively maintain power.
What does the government look like?
This really depends on how bloodless this revolution is. If it’s extremely bloody we may just see a less ludicrous version of the Taliban’s government post US-exit. Where the new government lacks individuals with authentic public service experience.
Would you keep anything from the old systems?
The old systems will likely come back if not replaced with something better.
What kind of leaders would you need?
Not the ones calling for this crayon consumer rhetoric. You’d need people who have both experience and community ties. The people calling for violent revolution have neither of those.
How do you stop it from turning into the NEXT horrible thing?
You can’t post-revolution. The inevitable outcome will be determined by how the revolution is achieved.
