Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

5

kestrel77 wrote

if they want, they can lend a hand and pitch in just like everyone else. the revolution is about equality, not revenge.

1

jadedctrl wrote (edited )

Let's be real, they won't want to help. They'll see themselves as the oppressed and fight tooth and nail at every single aspect of their new condition.
They need to be stripped of name, wealth, and moved away from other bourgeoisie, so that they can't try to start anything. Assuming that, in a planned (or semi-planned) economy, housing would be a right, the previous bourgeoisie should be moved into neighborhoods at a ratio of 1/10 at least-- 1 bourgie for every 10 proles. That way, they'll have the best chance at assimilating. Effectively, everyone in their environment will be working class, and the overall social pressure will make them at least fake wanting to help.
[If they don't... we have some nice gulags out back...] <-- This line is a joke, if you couldn't tell.

-1

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

jadedctrl wrote

Jesus, mate, can't a comrade joke?

-6

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

jadedctrl wrote

No, mate, I'm completely serious. It was a joke. I'm not an ML. I think gulags are completely disgusting, and my comment about them was obviously a throwaway joke.
It was the last line of my comment, didn't fit in with the rest at all, and even had sarcastic elipses twice...

-3

[deleted] wrote (edited )

2

jadedctrl wrote (edited )

I believe in a semi-planned economy (planned for resources like water, wood, minerals), but a calculated consumer market for everything else. Forced relocations would only be for the bourgeousie for the 1/10 ratio so that they can't start anything. No need to kill them, just assimilate them with the proles.

1

sudo wrote

the revolution is about equality, not revenge.

Some people on this site really need to learn this.

-1

Swami_rama wrote

It would be smart to execute a good number of oligarchs who's business practices brought particular harm and pain on the environment and people.

Those amazon warehouses are damn sweatshops, so his name would be at the top of my list. And the Rothchild banking family has trillions in ill gotten interest income from controlling central banks. Killing them isn't a big deal, we are merely separating their body from consciousness.

This lionization of Billionaires has got to stop.
First step is to start maligning them.

1

kestrel77 wrote

i also agree that the lionization of billionaires has to stop which is why i say, treat them like everyone else. if they want to get on board and give up their money and power and build communism... great, that's one less enemy.

when you get down to it, IMO this is the main thing that separates leftists from the other ideologies. there's always room for redemption and forgiveness... but where people continue to resist, fight them mercilessly in the name of freedom, and without cruelty or torture.

-3

zod wrote

And if they don't want to give up their properties and power, which is much more likely?

1

kestrel77 wrote

i mean, then they're just counter-revolutionaries and we all know what to do. death to all who stand in the way of obtaining freedom for working people.

0

[deleted] wrote (edited )

1

Defasher wrote (edited )

Theoretically after the state falls, they could continue to hoard property using private security that they pay with gold. Especially the ones that own islands.

1

kestrel77 wrote

that would still be still capitalism though, and the revolution isn't complete until the state and capital are abolished.

3

FreePianoKeys wrote (edited )

I'm legitimately concerned by some of the responses here. It's easy to say the rich ought to be forcibly deported or killed when you don't regularly speak calmly with any. They have lives and families as well. During and after the revolution, all former ties are severed. It isn't about how much their annual income was before, it's about whether they are willing to help the new society. The same expectations will apply to them as anyone else. As soon as we start to echo the rhetoric that the rich should be lynched for owning money, we have a situation like the Cultural Revolution on our hands.

1

surreal wrote

if they survive they can choose to help society or die alone of starvation.

1

Tequila_Wolf wrote (edited )

It's only after the revolution once the ruling classes don't exist. Some of them will get the opportunity to step down from their high places.

1

jadedctrl wrote

Yea, you're right. I think they meant more right after the proles abolish the bourgie state and put their own into place. Technically not the end of revolution, but it's the start of the end, for sure.

2

Tequila_Wolf wrote

I find that so odd. Similarly, I think the bourgie state still exists so long as there are bourgies. Their existence means the structure remains, it's just in competition with another state (assuming we're going state socialist here, which I don't understand either).

1

jadedctrl wrote

Their existence means the structure remains

Do you mean their existence, period? Even if they live as proles in wealth and conditions? Or do you mean their existence in the economic hierarchy? If the latter, yea, I totally agree.

1

Tequila_Wolf wrote

Both are the same thing. If you are bourgie, you can give up your privileges or die, either way you will cease to exist as bourgie.

After all the bourgies are gone, after decolonisation and all the structural inequality is gone and there are habits in place to keep them gone, after all norms are defined by the material context and not the other way around. Then it is after the revolution.

0

zer0crash wrote

One cannot trust a scorned, selfish person. They will betray anyone to attempt to return to their old way of life of exploitation and domination. In their eyes inequality is the natural order.

They will likely remain an existential threat to equality, so they would have to be restrained, or just murdered.