.
.
Subject: Re: 'permanent revolution' why & why not
.
.
.
.
.
.


 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...
 > ...

It is somewhat appaling I must say to read about people who want to
re-organize entire nations - entire continents - upon a program that
they themselves can not even describe in any detail whatsoever, much
less show how it should work part by part and action by action.

I suppose we could name this entire group of 'thinkers,' from Plato
which his impractical vague ideas, up to modern day marxists & anarchists:
The Naivetes. They are concerned with some sort of vague emotion. They
are not in the slightest concerned with what would be actual reality
after they gain any sort of defining influence in a nation or even
continent.

If I have to compare that with my own work: I am OBSESSED with every
detail, although unfortunately this all has to be rushed it maximum
speed because the time bomb of the 3rd world war is ticking loudly.

While not even one element of The Naivetes has ever made up something
that one could make out to be even a rough outline of a state system
that could be filled in with details, I'm wondering obsessively whether
the shoulder insignia of people won't induce a military hierarchy or
when we'd not have insignia whether that would on the contrary induce
chaos; or trying to simulate in the mind how a local council would
work, making up voting mechanisms that would be speedy yet controlled
and leave a trail for voter-groups to inspect for their delegate;
wondering whether the voter-groups have places to meet and on what
day that's supposed to happen and if that could all really function
in actual reality (THIS WORLD, ever heard of it ? It's called planet
Earth, dominating species being Humanity, it's a 2 legged creature);
and whether people would be offended by having it suggested that
the grouplets which are formed by suggested (not constitutional)
have a color name, and whether in the future the grouplets with the 
same name would also want to meet up and if so what that would do.

Fucking hell, what a load of detail it all is, isn't it. Basically
everything has to be re-arranged, and then have it work too, it's
not something to take lightly is it. You never want to put that
final straw on the camels back, so every milligram of detail has to be
looked at, for sake that it might just not break the back of the nation.
That all in all, it just might be enough to save the day, and have
things stabilize and find their own way.

And then I'm reading about this Communist/socialist/anarchist stuff
(on wikipedia, but still). I shake my head at so much recklessness,
so little thought, such a nearly absolute absence of any thought.
Why ? Why not take the time and make something nice that maybe at
least could be expanded into something that would function ?

How can you want to persue a revolution on the idea: 'we have to push
for the Unions to take over,' or the idea 'private proporty is not good.'
Strange & alien.

I ask you: if you go on a holiday, do you commit at little planning to
it as you do the entire world revolution ? You just charge out on the
idea 'sun is great' ? No idea where you would end up, simply point your
shoes to the Sun and go ? Yes ? If so, at least you'd be as reckless
with your own life as with the entire world.

'Centralized democracy.' It just stays with that word doesn't it. It is
''the idea.'' HOW IS THAT GOING TO FNUCTION ? You realize that if
there's no other parties or people doing it anymore (post revolution
you'd expect the bourgeois to be out for the count), someone has to ?
But wasn't national ballotting bad (certainly volnerable for corruption) ?
But no, not a thought on the entire matter that is the whole core of
much of non-anti-state socialist thought (the democratized state.)

'Federal worker councils.' Yeah ? Ok, that's better already. Hardly
something you can just get on and do though, and that's after more then
a century of 'thinking.' It has a kernel of something that can be
done, like an initial sketch. Still it as a terrible idea by the way,
because you get a major conflict of interest between the 'general
state,' and the specific needs and wants of these corporations. Oy and
then we get into this whole streak of 'planned economy' balloney.

Well, one thing is obvious: this really is the working class. Not an
ounce of common sense in how to order things/society, how to make laws
and how to govern. Not an idea at all, zip.

After my changes have been passed through, I'm therefore expecting a
situation where the people may all of a sudden have to learn how to
decide things, how to run their corporations, how to make minor laws in
Government, all the things grownups do. Because there is no knowledge of
this, and because you don't want to put the bourgeois back in, much less
the mafia type feudal lords and because it's mass-involved much more
anyway so there may not even be enough experienced bourgeois and
professional criminals to do the governing over you, this will probably
result in a period of about 15 years where things don't really work as
smoothly as they ought to. But it'll correct itself no doubt.
--