Do you ever think of if the Revolution ever happens that communist parties are so tiny and have been so antagonized that people might just not listen to them?
In the West communist parties are tiny compared to the rest of the population and have been antagonized for almost a century.
I literally don’t know one American irl that knows what communism and socialism actually are and all of them just think that both of those are bad
I am not so sure that westerners will listen to communist even when they are doing a Revolution. I think that probably a París Commune 2.0 will happen.
Soviet Pigeon - 9mon
Parties can be small and then become quite big and a majority. The Bolsheviks were a minority, don't forget it. It works also the other way around, look how the SED disappeared.
31
Kultronx - 9mon
Yes, I think about this often. Many parties, especially in the global north. Decades of propaganda, infighting, and distance from the masses have led to a lot of irrelevance.
16
NothingButBits - 9mon
But that's also because of the shrinking of proletarian in the First World. Most productive jobs have been outsourced to the Third World. Many workers in the Global North want to become bourgeoise, they have no material interest in revolution.
16
trashxeos - 9mon
It's worth pointing out that the population clamoring to become bourgeoise comes from a place of constant capitalist propaganda from birth. I used to want that as well, until the right people at the right time of my life pointed me at the right content creators which led me to theory. Now, instead of wanting to become bourgeoise, I want to make bourgeoise proletariat again.
12
Makan - 9mon
I think that there will be a democratic revolution before a socialist revolution.
This antagonism will disappear if the communists come into power and manage to improve the lives of the people
10
Makan - 9mon
It's not that simple
12
OrnluWolfjarl - 9mon
There's an anecdotal statistic going around historian circles, that if a revolution gets 1% of the country's population to participate in some capacity, then it succeeds.
4
Spectre - 9mon
What is the logic behind that?
2
OrnluWolfjarl - 9mon
More of an observation that most successful revolutions or protests so far in history, where we have data for, had at least this many people.
When I learned of this, it was used to make a point that 1% of a country is actually quite a lot of people when they get together.
5
Orcinus - 9mon
Alright, so 3.4 million people in the US's case. That's over a thousand times as many people as the group who stormed the capitol. Could work, I'd say.
3
ocean @lemmy.selfhostcat.com - 7mon
My local maoist study group is exactly who you’re describing. Not only does no one know what they are but they’re bunch of weird bozos who can’t understand anything but specific texts. Got to actually reach people to be successful
Confidant6198 in asklemmygrad
Do you ever think of if the Revolution ever happens that communist parties are so tiny and have been so antagonized that people might just not listen to them?
In the West communist parties are tiny compared to the rest of the population and have been antagonized for almost a century.
I literally don’t know one American irl that knows what communism and socialism actually are and all of them just think that both of those are bad
Kind of like this
https://www.vxtiktok.com/t/ZT2C7LsHj/
I am not so sure that westerners will listen to communist even when they are doing a Revolution. I think that probably a París Commune 2.0 will happen.
Parties can be small and then become quite big and a majority. The Bolsheviks were a minority, don't forget it. It works also the other way around, look how the SED disappeared.
Yes, I think about this often. Many parties, especially in the global north. Decades of propaganda, infighting, and distance from the masses have led to a lot of irrelevance.
But that's also because of the shrinking of proletarian in the First World. Most productive jobs have been outsourced to the Third World. Many workers in the Global North want to become bourgeoise, they have no material interest in revolution.
It's worth pointing out that the population clamoring to become bourgeoise comes from a place of constant capitalist propaganda from birth. I used to want that as well, until the right people at the right time of my life pointed me at the right content creators which led me to theory. Now, instead of wanting to become bourgeoise, I want to make bourgeoise proletariat again.
I think that there will be a democratic revolution before a socialist revolution.
Similar to New Democracy concept of Mao Zedong.
Watch this.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
This antagonism will disappear if the communists come into power and manage to improve the lives of the people
It's not that simple
There's an anecdotal statistic going around historian circles, that if a revolution gets 1% of the country's population to participate in some capacity, then it succeeds.
What is the logic behind that?
More of an observation that most successful revolutions or protests so far in history, where we have data for, had at least this many people.
When I learned of this, it was used to make a point that 1% of a country is actually quite a lot of people when they get together.
Alright, so 3.4 million people in the US's case. That's over a thousand times as many people as the group who stormed the capitol. Could work, I'd say.
My local maoist study group is exactly who you’re describing. Not only does no one know what they are but they’re bunch of weird bozos who can’t understand anything but specific texts. Got to actually reach people to be successful