We can see a pattern through the history of revolution, when unelected figures of power are removed from their power, they always revolt against the revolution.
We can see this in the French Revolution, where the French Bourgeois class regained their positions in government and reaffirmed their power over the proletariat - taking advantage of the killing of the Aristocrats to boost their power.
The Russian Revolution, where the Whites revolted against the Reds. The Whites being predominately led by members of the Russian Bourgeois class. Then, later the Kulaks, who burnt their grain and killed their cattle in protest against the Soviet Union not giving them the right to exploit the proletariat.
In Vietnam, the Bourgeois class joined the South Vietnamese government and funded the SVA (Or ARV, depending on who you ask. ARV standing for “Army of the Republic of Vietnam”). We see the same thing happen in Korea. In Cuba too, where the Cuban Bourgeois class supported and funded the military dictatorship, then fled to Florida once the Communist forces got too powerful.
We can even see this in the American Civil War, though it wasn’t a revolution. Southern politicians told Southerners to vote Democrat, as part of fear-politic-ing them into believing the Republicans wanted to liberate the slaves (they didn’t until later in the war, Abolition of Slavery was a splinter movement at the time), and the Southern Bourgeois class revolted against the Northern Bourgeois class over the inclination that they would lose their unelected power over black Americans.
In the case of the Russian Revolution, the Communists killed the Tzar and his family to put down the threat of Tzarist sentiment rising again post-rev. In the case of the Chinese Revolution, the Communists killed the lord class, to put down the threat of feudal counter-revolutionary sentiment rising again post-rev.
The murder of the bourgeois class isn’t just an emotional response to the horrors of bourgeois politics. It’s an attempt to secure the future, by removing the largest sources of counter-revolution from your society. Much of China’s Bourgeois class escaped into Taiwan and Hong Kong once the Communists became too great a force to resist, the remaining Bourgeois class in China needed to be dealt with, as they wouldn’t just assimilate into Marxist ideology. They were bound to try to regain their power to exploit the Proletariat.
So, do you have another suggestion? Or are you just doing what all western leftists do on this subject; moral 'splaining so you don’t have to accept that sometimes murder is necessary for the longevity of the revolution.
ok before I begin I have to say two things, first is that I’m really uneducated when it comes to this subject, so please excuse my ignorance. second is that I’m not trying to splain anything or virtue signal at all, I just wrote what I thought when I saw the post, and I tried to be honest, so please assume good faith.
The murder of the bourgeois class isn’t just an emotional response to the horrors of bourgeois politics. It’s an attempt to secure the future, by removing the largest sources of counter-revolution from your society.
but can’t it be done by capturing their wealth and therefore diminish their power? I mean what else do they have other than property and political power? aren’t they declawed when you take both?
and they are always outnumbered by the working class, so how can they do anything against the revolution when they are powerless?
and aren’t Chinese billionaires currently exploiting the working class again? so there is still the bourgeois class, right?
but can’t it be done by capturing their wealth and therefore diminish their power?
This is definitely the case in modern China, where the Communist Party has a strong hold over the country and its bourgeois class, so internal counter-revolutionary fervor isn’t as terrifying of a threat as it was in the beginning periods of the PRC’s establishment. But in its inception, the PRC had to secure its future and be very strict toward the lord class, lest the lords attempt a counter-revolution, which as @Farmer_Heck@lemmygrad.ml has said, is very common in every revolution. Plus, many PRC citizens still had the suffering they endured under the lords fresh on their mind, as opposed to now where feudal lords no longer exist in the same capacity.
and aren’t Chinese billionaires currently exploiting the working class again? so there is still the bourgeois class, right?
Yes, the bourgeoisie and billionaires still exist in modern China, but do not have the level of control over society that they do in the West. Yes, those billionaires are still exploiting the working class. It is one of the many contradictions that China has to contend with as it develops socialism in a capitalist world.
wow, wow, thank you for that article! just finished reading it, it was awesome :D
but honestly it made me feel like an absolute idiot, lol, but I guess I needed it.
But in its inception, the PRC had to secure its future and be very strict toward the lord class, lest the lords attempt a counter-revolution, which as @Farmer_Heck@lemmygrad.ml has said, is very common in every revolution.
still killing millions of people sounds like a really sad event, I mean millions of lives … T_T
We can see a pattern through the history of revolution, when unelected figures of power are removed from their power, they always revolt against the revolution.
We can see this in the French Revolution, where the French Bourgeois class regained their positions in government and reaffirmed their power over the proletariat - taking advantage of the killing of the Aristocrats to boost their power.
The Russian Revolution, where the Whites revolted against the Reds. The Whites being predominately led by members of the Russian Bourgeois class. Then, later the Kulaks, who burnt their grain and killed their cattle in protest against the Soviet Union not giving them the right to exploit the proletariat.
In Vietnam, the Bourgeois class joined the South Vietnamese government and funded the SVA (Or ARV, depending on who you ask. ARV standing for “Army of the Republic of Vietnam”). We see the same thing happen in Korea. In Cuba too, where the Cuban Bourgeois class supported and funded the military dictatorship, then fled to Florida once the Communist forces got too powerful.
We can even see this in the American Civil War, though it wasn’t a revolution. Southern politicians told Southerners to vote Democrat, as part of fear-politic-ing them into believing the Republicans wanted to liberate the slaves (they didn’t until later in the war, Abolition of Slavery was a splinter movement at the time), and the Southern Bourgeois class revolted against the Northern Bourgeois class over the inclination that they would lose their unelected power over black Americans.
In the case of the Russian Revolution, the Communists killed the Tzar and his family to put down the threat of Tzarist sentiment rising again post-rev. In the case of the Chinese Revolution, the Communists killed the lord class, to put down the threat of feudal counter-revolutionary sentiment rising again post-rev.
The murder of the bourgeois class isn’t just an emotional response to the horrors of bourgeois politics. It’s an attempt to secure the future, by removing the largest sources of counter-revolution from your society. Much of China’s Bourgeois class escaped into Taiwan and Hong Kong once the Communists became too great a force to resist, the remaining Bourgeois class in China needed to be dealt with, as they wouldn’t just assimilate into Marxist ideology. They were bound to try to regain their power to exploit the Proletariat.
So, do you have another suggestion? Or are you just doing what all western leftists do on this subject; moral 'splaining so you don’t have to accept that sometimes murder is necessary for the longevity of the revolution.
ok before I begin I have to say two things, first is that I’m really uneducated when it comes to this subject, so please excuse my ignorance. second is that I’m not trying to splain anything or virtue signal at all, I just wrote what I thought when I saw the post, and I tried to be honest, so please assume good faith.
but can’t it be done by capturing their wealth and therefore diminish their power? I mean what else do they have other than property and political power? aren’t they declawed when you take both?
and they are always outnumbered by the working class, so how can they do anything against the revolution when they are powerless?
and aren’t Chinese billionaires currently exploiting the working class again? so there is still the bourgeois class, right?
This is definitely the case in modern China, where the Communist Party has a strong hold over the country and its bourgeois class, so internal counter-revolutionary fervor isn’t as terrifying of a threat as it was in the beginning periods of the PRC’s establishment. But in its inception, the PRC had to secure its future and be very strict toward the lord class, lest the lords attempt a counter-revolution, which as @Farmer_Heck@lemmygrad.ml has said, is very common in every revolution. Plus, many PRC citizens still had the suffering they endured under the lords fresh on their mind, as opposed to now where feudal lords no longer exist in the same capacity.
Yes, the bourgeoisie and billionaires still exist in modern China, but do not have the level of control over society that they do in the West. Yes, those billionaires are still exploiting the working class. It is one of the many contradictions that China has to contend with as it develops socialism in a capitalist world.
Here’s a good read on the subject of billionaires in China.
wow, wow, thank you for that article! just finished reading it, it was awesome :D
but honestly it made me feel like an absolute idiot, lol, but I guess I needed it.
still killing millions of people sounds like a really sad event, I mean millions of lives … T_T